David Icke's Official Forums (https://forum.davidicke.com/index.php)
-   Big Brother / Microchipping / Problem-Reaction-Solution (https://forum.davidicke.com/forumdisplay.php?f=7)
-   -   Italy in racism debate as migrants quit riot town (https://forum.davidicke.com/showthread.php?t=99344)

jiffy 18-01-2010 03:59 PM

[QUOTE=drakul;1058562682]
Quote:

Originally Posted by jiffy (Post 1058562531)


Check your dictionary. `SPELLED' is the first past tense of SPELL provided.

`SPELT' is 2nd (kind of a slang term for people with `edcutation' I guess). `SPELT' is also a kind of wheat.



:rolleyes:

I have no need, Spelled is an American way of writing this sentence .

The British (who invented the language) is to use the world SPELT.

To the British 'edcutated' ear SPELLED just sounds "wrong"

Your "theory" that because SPELLED appears first in your

dictionary thus making it the 'first' past tense, holds as much weight as your moronic race argument.

Well I never there is a first past tense making a second past tense.....well less right ROFL

So 'SPELT' is slang...dear me....there is no hope

zarah 18-01-2010 07:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by purple rain (Post 1058560577)
'pointless and bullying' is a tag as much as 'hate speech.'

Once again.

What makes you think you get to choose what free speech is? If you did believe in it, you wouldn't be tagging something as negative or pointless. And asking why the term 'hate speech' is allowed on the forum. I think clear cut racism is pretty much pointless and negative.

So let's go round in circles, what gives you the right to define what is labelled as 'pointless'?

If you can't see the difference between exercising one's right to debate and address points of an argument and using a debate to cast aspersions on character and call someone negative names, then that's your problem.

krakhead 18-01-2010 07:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by real6 (Post 1058562719)
Mods: Can we get this put back into Today's news. I don't see how this is 'Big Brother / Microchipping / Problem-Reaction-Solution'

That was me. I like to clear today's news every now and then, but I never know where to put race threads! I read the OP and figured it could be viewed as a PRS type thing. Maybe we need a race relation section?

zarah 18-01-2010 07:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mysticmolly (Post 1058561261)
Yes, this is true but it is also the NWO wish that you not notice all the problems which are caused by forcing people of different cultures and believes ... and just plain different, together.

I am addressing that issue ...

There is fuck all we can do about the NWO or their power to cause this crap.

But we can wake up to the issues and problems that it is causing and not carry on in an induced sheep sleep ...

with all this "love and love for all" ...motto ... that will just lead to more heartache and such.

I think that mass immigration and migration serves two purposes: 1 - it dilutes the dominant culture, as I said before. In order to introduce a 'global government' we have to have a mish - mash, mixed up culture, where there isn't any national soveriegnty as such, it's been transfered to a federal bureau, such as the EU, there isn't any borders and there's one dominant spoken langauge and one practices main religion. 2 - The fact that some cultures ARE being diluted causes many, many people of those cultures to feel resentful and angry towards those from other countries who they perceive to be to blame for the fact that their culture is being diluted. This is a distraction, because while everyone's busy arguing who's at fault, the elite are continuing with their NWO plan.

zarah 18-01-2010 07:36 PM

[QUOTE=jiffy;1058562802]
Quote:

Originally Posted by drakul (Post 1058562682)

I have no need, Spelled is an American way of writing this sentence .

The British (who invented the language) is to use the world SPELT.

To the British 'edcutated' ear SPELLED just sounds "wrong"

Your "theory" that because SPELLED appears first in your

dictionary thus making it the 'first' past tense, holds as much weight as your moronic race argument.

Well I never there is a first past tense making a second past tense.....well less right ROFL

So 'SPELT' is slang...dear me....there is no hope

I do appreicate a bit of forum pedanticalness from time to time. ;)

purple rain 18-01-2010 07:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by zarah (Post 1058563264)
So let's go round in circles, what gives you the right to define what is labelled as 'pointless'?

If you can't see the difference between exercising one's right to debate and address points of an argument and using a debate to cast aspersions on character and call someone negative names, then that's your problem.

I have the exact same right as you.

If you can't see racist behaviour for what it is, then that's your problem. You say it's wrong to use negative names, but racism does that and also is inciting violence against other races. Maybe you should think awhile before posting something so pseudo-intellectual.

zarah 18-01-2010 07:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by purple rain (Post 1058563301)
I have the exact same right as you.

If you can't see racist behaviour for what it is, then that's your problem. You say it's wrong to use negative names, but racism does that and also is inciting violence against other races. Maybe you should think awhile before posting something so pseudo-intellectual.

And I the same, no?

I say HE was wrong to call her names, when he could just as easily have pulled apart her reasoning. It was a lame arsed attempt at ridicule. Why should she be ridiculed just because she has an opinion which he or you or any of us don't agree with?

I see racist behaviour for what it is, ta muchly, and I have no need for you to stroll around my posts like the PC police. Her posts seem not to be based so much on a dislike for other races, as a love for her own. Whether she's right or wrong, she has an asbolute right to be spoken to with respect.

You'd do well to think a tad before you post your anti-white drivel, which you quite obviously think is either a) in jest *rme* b) Justified of c) isn't anti-white at all. Especially when you have the gall of accusing me of not recognising 'racist behaviour' ...cos quite clearly fella, having just pulled you up..I do. :)

purple rain 18-01-2010 08:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by zarah (Post 1058563326)
And I the same, no?




But you're the free speech cheer leader if I remember, not me. Problem with a flow of logic I know.

Quote:

I say HE was wrong to call her names, when he could just as easily have pulled apart her reasoning. It was a lame arsed attempt at ridicule. Why should she be ridiculed just because she has an opinion which he or you or any of us don't agree with?
He has every right to call her names as much as she has to speak of her opinions. It's all free speech. (not counting board rules)


Quote:

I see racist behaviour for what it is, ta muchly, and I have no need for you to stroll around my posts like the PC police. Her posts seem not to be based so much on a dislike for other races, as a love for her own. Whether she's right or wrong, she has an asbolute right to be spoken to with respect.
You're one of the few to think that. Most of the normal people here can see what she types. Aside from Molly you're one of THE most irrational people I've encountered here. You'll find any number of ways to twist and turn around something to make it something it isn't.


Quote:

You'd do well to think a tad before you post your anti-white drivel
,


WTF? Ok, so you're just stupid aren't you. Your mind seems to work backwards. Obvious racism doesn't exist, but now I'm anti-white? lol! Also symptomatic of losing an argument.

Quote:

which you quite obviously think is either a) in jest *rme* b) Justified of c) isn't anti-white at all. Especially when you have the gall of accusing me of not recognising 'racist behaviour' ...cos quite clearly fella, having just pulled you up..I do. :)
^ Brain damage.

architectorion 18-01-2010 09:30 PM

If immigrants want to flood into the established boarders of other people's nations in this day and age they can just expect to be frowned upon, nobody has to celebrate multiculturalism if they simply don't like it in thier land. Everywhere on earth that a man puts his feet on the ground in the morning and calls it his homeland has been fought over and won by blood sometime in the past. That goes for the Italians, Kenyans, French, Chinese, Iranians and even the Americans, nobody can sit and say thier people didn't WIN the right to live where they live at. So if floods of immigrants can be viewed as an act of war by invading peoples, then the people whose countries are being flooded can react in kind. And they will continue to push further, these little noises being made are only the beginning.

zarah 18-01-2010 10:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by purple rain (Post 1058563378)
But you're the free speech cheer leader if I remember, not me. Problem with a flow of logic I know.

No. The problem is with you. Free speech doesn't equate to speech without limitations.


Quote:

He has every right to call her names as much as she has to speak of her opinions. It's all free speech. (not counting board rules)
Well the fact that to insult someone IS to contravene forum rules is just an example of free speech with limitations.

Quote:

You're one of the few to think that. Most of the normal people here can see what she types. Aside from Molly you're one of THE most irrational people I've encountered here. You'll find any number of ways to twist and turn around something to make it something it isn't.
So not only are we all to tolerate your quite obvious hypocrisy and failure to apply the same parameters to yourself you set upon others, we're now to accept your definition of what constitutes a 'normal' member?

Your opinon could well be that I'm irrational and maipulate argument, I quite like the latter label because I'm studying law.

Your opinion is simply your view, and you're entitled to have it, just as Molly is entitled to have hers. If you bothered reading my posts, instead of just thinking up the next rebuttal, you would see that I don't agree with her blaming of people who are in the same position as us. We're all victims. Even you. I agree with her point in the larger perspective which is that there is a deliberate attempt by the elite (as I choose to call them) to dilute national culture. David also makes this point in his last book (I think it was his last anyway.)





Quote:

WTF? Ok, so you're just stupid aren't you. Your mind seems to work backwards. Obvious racism doesn't exist, but now I'm anti-white? lol! Also symptomatic of losing an argument.
I thought I typed quite plainly. Again I'll simplify. You accuse Molly of being racist, and you accuse me of not being able to identify racist behaviour. With me so far? Okay...now, although I really can't be bothered to trawl this forum with the evidence, you have, on more than one occasion, posted comments which contain negative racial overtones towards white people. If we were to apply the same standards to your posts which you're so quick to have us all apply to Molly's, you're also racist. As I've already noticed this prior to posting this or my last comment, I can quite clearly identify 'racist behaviour'. Now do you see? If not, best just leave it be...

There is no argument here, there's just you playing devil's advocate rather poorly.


Quote:

^ Brain damage.
Ummm...so I post a reasoning which you can't quite get your head round and you then respond by accusing me of having cerebal impairment? You really are such a bloody winner :)

Anyway, I have an early start, so Im off to bed with cocoa and David..alas only in book form. N'night :)

purple rain 18-01-2010 11:14 PM

You're a nutcase period. You equated my posts as hateful on the same level as Molly's even though I've not said a single thing about race. Even if I said the white race is evil (nowhere close) that would still not compare with anything the racists here say. Anglo-American empire's atrocities, yes. Which is real. You're a confused person with NO arguement.


And 'free speech with limitations' I like that one Bwahahaha! And quite conveniently, you think its ok to set your limitations about using the term hate speech. Other's can't about clear criminal, talk which can incite hatred and land you in court! FFS, either accept those limitations or shut up!

zarah 19-01-2010 05:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by purple rain (Post 1058564000)
You're a nutcase period. You equated my posts as hateful on the same level as Molly's even though I've not said a single thing about race. Even if I said the white race is evil (nowhere close) that would still not compare with anything the racists here say. Anglo-American empire's atrocities, yes. Which is real. You're a confused person with NO arguement.

'Period' meaning there isn't a point in a rebuttal because as you decide now so it is? :confused:

You're missing my point entirely. This whole 'debate' between you and I originated because I pulled someone up for calling Molly names, without attacking the content of what she posted. To me that's pure unstructured laziness, which doesn't help any debate, it causes nothing more than antagonism and arguments. You then decided to wade in with your size 4's and defend the guy's right to name call as part of an abstract 'freedom of speech' concept. You then argued that either Molly's posts or Molly herself was racist, which justified any insult thrown at her, and accused me of not recognising 'racist behaviour'.

Now, last time I checked, one could attach the label of 'racist' or 'racism' to any person or statement which disparaged a racial group based solely on their race. Now, Molly or Molly's comments, one could argue, can be placed in the category of 'racist' or someone who displays 'racist behaviour' using this definition, you're right.

However, I would argue that your posts also smack of racism, if one were to use the definition above. As you have made numerous negative and disparaging comments about the caucasion race. Now, obviously you won't agree, just as I don't agree that my argument (or character) is irrational.

This is a pointless argument that I've continued simply because you seem to have a habit of strolling around like PC Patrol, highlightling what you see as injustice in posts, when quite clearly you have your own issues about racial perception, which again, comments made in the paragraph above clearly illustrate (highlighted for your convenience.)

So actually I quite clearly DO have an argument, just one that you don't agree with.


Quote:

And 'free speech with limitations' I like that one Bwahahaha! And quite conveniently, you think its ok to set your limitations about using the term hate speech. Other's can't about clear criminal, talk which can incite hatred and land you in court! FFS, either accept those limitations or shut up!
Ummm I don't use the term 'hate speech' unless I'm commenting it being used as a label by someone else. What an appalling Orwellian term! Almost as bad as 'political correctness' or 'positive discrimination' (an oxymoron if ever there was one.) In fact, I can't abide labels in general. Pointless and constrictive.

The rest of your almost hysterical rant I didn't understand. Although I would urge you to take a gander in the freeman-of-the-land (or on the land, Im not quite sure) sub-forum, so as to understand the difference between 'legal' and 'lawful,'

purple rain 19-01-2010 05:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by zarah (Post 1058564506)
As you have made numerous negative and disparaging comments about the caucasion race. Now, obviously you won't agree, just as I don't agree that my argument (or character) is irrational.

I would like you to link to a single post where I bashed the 'caucasion race'. Now it's come to this, you're making things up I never said. One example. This is why I said you're mental. You can't face upto to any criticism so you offload it onto others, and quite often 'tptb' instead of your country.

Quote:

This is a pointless argument that I've continued simply because you seem to have a habit of strolling around like PC Patrol, highlightling what you see as injustice in posts, when quite clearly you have your own issues about racial perception, which again, comments made in the paragraph above clearly illustrate (highlighted for your convenience.)

What a silly person you are. Btw you happen to be the morality police.

Quote:

Ummm I don't use the term 'hate speech' unless I'm commenting it being used as a label by someone else. What an appalling Orwellian term! Almost as bad as 'political correctness' or 'positive discrimination' (an oxymoron if ever there was one.) In fact, I can't abide labels in general. Pointless and constrictive.


Racist speech is good enough. We put a label on everything, but the idea is still there.


Quote:

The rest of your almost hysterical rant I didn't understand. Although I would urge you to take a gander in the freeman-of-the-land (or on the land, Im not quite sure) sub-forum, so as to understand the difference between 'legal' and 'lawful,'
[/QUOTE]


I wouldn't know, but I do know that one would get into serious trouble for it. If you want to pick and choose what fo speech is you should start your own community.

zarah 19-01-2010 06:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by purple rain (Post 1058564516)
I would like you to link to a single post where I bashed the 'caucasion race'. Now it's come to this, you're making things up I never said. One example. This is why I said you're mental. You can't face upto to any criticism so you offload it onto others, and quite often 'tptb' instead of your country.

Unless you deleted the posts, they're still there in all their glory. Of course you try to qualify your statements by harping on about crimes those in power who were white committed in history, but they're there all the same.

Quote:

What a silly person you are. Btw you happen to be the morality police.
The implication being I'm 'silly' and you're?.....All knowing? Most learned? More enlightened than me? Do you see how inserting an insult seems to negate the need for one to actually argue the content of a post? You just did it.

Quote:

Racist speech is good enough. We put a label on everything, but the idea is still there.


No. Society puts a label on everything to control the flow of information and discourse.
Quote:



I wouldn't know, but I do know that one would get into serious trouble for it. If you want to pick and choose what fo speech is you should start your own community.
Well then perhaps understand that to be 'racist' is to be 'racist' no matter what race the person you're being 'racist' about is. No?

Anyway, enough of this neverending argument about pedantics. If you'd like the last word go right ahead. :)

xeon 19-01-2010 07:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by krakhead (Post 1058563268)
That was me. I like to clear today's news every now and then, but I never know where to put race threads! I read the OP and figured it could be viewed as a PRS type thing. Maybe we need a race relation section?

Sounds like a good idea. :)

By the way, from an ecological standpoint, just saw this on Yahoo today :cool:

http://finance.yahoo.com/banking-bud...trading-system

In science, many foreign species have displaced the original native species of the particular area.

I know, I know, humans are not animals and vice versa. Just noticed this news on Yahoo today. If competition can exist among animals, why not among humans? Oh I forgot, we are not supposed to be animals in any way :p

purple rain 19-01-2010 07:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by zarah (Post 1058564559)
Unless you deleted the posts, they're still there in all their glory. Of course you try to qualify your statements by harping on about crimes those in power who were white committed in history, but they're there all the same.




Because they are qualified by putting it that way. I focussed on nationality not race. Hence my calling you a silly person.

Quote:

The implication being I'm 'silly' and you're?.....All knowing? Most learned? More enlightened than me? Do you see how inserting an insult seems to negate the need for one to actually argue the content of a post? You just did it.
I do both. In a crowd of listeners no one would say you were being rational, you can only get away with it on the internet if that; all my 'insults' were justified.


Quote:

[COLOR"]No. Society puts a label on everything to control the flow of information and discourse.

Quote:

Well then perhaps understand that to be 'racist' is to be 'racist' no matter what race the person you're being 'racist' about is. No?

Anyway, enough of this neverending argument about pedantics. If you'd like the last word go right ahead. :)

I will, thanks. You're a master of projection. You're the one making pedantic arguements about race. No one in the 'REAL WORLD' would say that I was being racist. And they certainly wouldn't say that MM was simply being proud of her race. That's why you are silly, extremely silly. Your bs is strictly for the internet where nothing has to have a basis in reality. Again, silly person.:D

mysticmolly 19-01-2010 07:55 AM

Yeah and you are never racist are you?

http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showp...&postcount=116

http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showp...7&postcount=70

geezer661 19-01-2010 09:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mysticmolly (Post 1058564606)

My god wht a racist arseole. Why dnt u fuk off n live in the mid east if u love sharia law so much. Oh yea I forgot u don't get benefits over there do you. Fkin twt. You supress women because you fear them. Your all closet homosexuals. Is it the bedsheet u muzzies wear tht turns u on? Please tell me

rydeon 19-01-2010 10:46 AM

Give him rock all Geezer. He's been out to cause troll disruption and bad vibes as long as I remember!

purple rain 19-01-2010 11:38 AM

Looks like the rednecks are out in full force.


All times are GMT. The time now is 03:40 AM.