O/T The EU bailout

[monty_rhodes]

You wrote exactly the same on another thread that contained the same story.

You can't call someone a w*nker on here but it's OK to sneakily suggest another poster is a thicko. John2 is a pain in the rrse and a complete muppet. He constantly refers to unsubstantiated claims about the benefits of immigration but when pointed by wiser counsel to academic studies that suggest the opposite he simply goes quiet and after a few weeks spouts the same nonsense.

[millmoormagic]

You can't call someone a w*nker on here but it's OK to sneakily suggest another poster is a thicko. John2 is a pain in the rrse and a complete muppet. He constantly refers to unsubstantiated claims about the benefits of immigration but when pointed by wiser counsel to academic studies that suggest the opposite he simply goes quiet and after a few weeks spouts the same nonsense.

Cheeky at best that, John2 is one of the few on here who does back his arguments up with fact, but then gets lambasted for being 'the google king' by folk like you....facts are facts, wherever they're sourced.

[monty_rhodes]

Cheeky at best that, John2 is one of the few on here who does back his arguments up with fact, but then gets lambasted for being 'the google king' by folk like you....facts are facts, wherever they're sourced.

You often let yourself down MMM. The statement "...facts are facts, wherever they're sourced." is so idiotic as to defy comment. The point I was making (as you well know) is that John is constantly selective in his evidence. When counter evidence is presented to him (or Kerr) he simply ignores it, disappears and spouts the same selective garbage a few weeks later. Kerr's favourite is to ignore 4 out of 5 points which disagree with him and and then spin the 5th point stating that because it was in the Times, Sunday Times etc it's obviously Murdoch propaganda. You lefties are the most illiberal mob of dissemblers I've ever encountered.

[millmoormagic]

You often let yourself down MMM. The statement "...facts are facts, wherever they're sourced." is so idiotic as to defy comment. The point I was making (as you well know) is that John is constantly selective in his evidence. When counter evidence is presented to him (or Kerr) he simply ignores it, disappears and spouts the same selective garbage a few weeks later. Kerr's favourite is to ignore 4 out of 5 points which disagree with him and and then spin the 5th point stating that because it was in the Times, Sunday Times etc it's obviously Murdoch propaganda. You lefties are the most illiberal mob of dissemblers I've ever encountered.

I think you'll find you're the very best at ignoring facts when presented to you, in our last tete a tete you basically went missing when i found you out, now, i know you're being cheeky again, just thought i'd respond in kind....