Please Watch This.

[renegotiation]

I think this should be closed before it gets nasty!!!!

 

Very true, my only problem being I live with one of the arguers . I was poking fun at my OH really. Should have made that clearer

 

I do believe that everybody has a right to their opinion, I have to say when it comes to this conspiracy theory type stuff I have the patience of a stuffed llama. It's just not my cup of tea. Each to their own, but I get fed up of it and find in most cases (and I don't mean just my beloved, as this thread clearly shows) with this subject many people seem to think that if you disagree with them it's becaue you don't have the correct facts etc, when it could be that you just don't agree with them, even with all the facts spelled out. I find it to be a very volitile subject and can (in some households ) rival religion in bringing out the nasties in people as similarly, everyone believes they know the truth, and people who believe otherwise are either deluded or have not been shown the 'real' truth yet.

 

*gets off soapbox before OH lobbs something*

 

You are quite right that the moderators do a fantastic job in allowing controversial subjects to be discussed so openly.

 

I'm sorry to hear of your household woes. No one is obliged to post on threads. If you think banks don't own governments, then I would suggest you think again. If we disagree, then we disagree.

 

I think this should be closed before it gets nasty!!!!

 

Don't be so paranoid.

[renegotiation]

I disagree. I think that debate, even where people are at loggerheads, is ultimately a healthy thing, both for all those involved in the debate and for the reputation of the board that allows it, and the mods are to be commended for keeping such threads open.

For those involved in the debate itself, they should have the freedom and opportunity to say their piece without fear of restraint or short-sighted moderation, and if people don't like the thread or the nature of the debate they don't have to post in it.

 

I don't, for example, agree with a great deal of what renegotiation witters on about; indeed, I find hir consistently ignorant, irrepressibly confused and given to childish and ad hominem posts when people don't agree with their way of thinking. Renegotiation, in turn, presumably finds Uncle Tez arrogant, sarcastic and overly critical, but whilst we rarely agree, I absolutely believe in everyone's right to make their statements without fear of thread closure or moderation.

 

I think you need to be imprisoned for disagreeing with me you tinfoil hatted fiend. Liberate his moggy!!!

 

 

 

Uncle Tez......You to the words right outa my mouth...........(time to sing)

 

No singing on this thread.

[renegotiation]

I am very happy to talk you through all of this one step at a time. First things first, are you saying that my response to all of what you said should simply be based on the last two lines of what you said? If not, then why are you focusing on the last two lines of what you said in relation to my response? Please, answer me this question and I will happy to assist you further.

 

Maybe you should re-read the above:idea::idea::idea::idea::idea:

 

As I thought, you won't answer the question.

[Beck1968]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Beck1968

Firstly I will use your own words.......

if it is all here 'already', then why are they pushing so damn hard for more political union

 

The fact is you, me and every other member of the human race on this planet need to get along, or not only will we kill Ourselves, but all the other species on this planet.

 

we need to adopt a set of global laws that govern the acceptable actions of mankind

 

for instance - in some countries,

it is acceptable for a girl of less than 10 years old to be married

to drive a car with no driving licence

to hold 50 pounds of explosives in your own home

 

laws not only govern but protect the public

 

Renegotiation

Tell you what. How about I see that working in our country before expanding it globally? Furthermore, I take it you are of the opinion that the people should have no say in this?

 

 

Beck

Take a look at the last two of my previous statements and then take a look at your response

 

 

Renegotiation

I am very happy to talk you through all of this one step at a time. First things first, are you saying that my response to all of what you said should simply be based on the last two lines of what you said? If not, then why are you focusing on the last two lines of what you said in relation to my response? Please, answer me this question and I will happy to assist you further

 

 

 

Beck

As above i said take a look at my last two statements

 

So you think it is Ok for a girl of under 10 to be married.....you must be a sick individual to think that, and i would hope you are already on the sex offenders register

 

as for the rest....your just A Not Right

[Mungypup]

I'm sorry to hear of your household woes. No one is obliged to post on threads. If you think banks don't own governments, then I would suggest you think again. If we disagree, then we disagree.

 

 

 

 

Don't be so paranoid.

 

At what point did I mention banks and governments my dear? I have not engaged in discussing your opinions in any detail (at all), and I will not, as I do not wish to get drawn into your debate, which is quite clearly what you are trying to bait people to do. If other people take the bait, so be it. I didn't mention either, lol, so I find your reply quite amuzing.

 

You were clearly not getting the sarcasm and tounge in cheekness of what I did say sweetie!! My household is a very happy one my dear, very open minded and full of different opinions , but thank you for your concern, it's quite touching .

 

I think it's you who is possibly paranoid. Bless you, so many worries, so little time to spread them.

 

I have decided to leave this thread to let it have it's natural peacefull passing. It's the right thing to do

Edited February 3, 2010 by Mungypup

[renegotiation]

Beck

As above i said take a look at my last two statements

 

So you think it is Ok for a girl of under 10 to be married.....you must be a sick individual to think that, and i would hope you are already on the sex offenders register

 

as for the rest....your just A Not Right

 

I have thought long and hard before compiling my response to those disgusting comments. You said:

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Beck1968

Firstly I will use your own words.......

if it is all here 'already', then why are they pushing so damn hard for more political union

 

The fact is you, me and every other member of the human race on this planet need to get along, or not only will we kill Ourselves, but all the other species on this planet.

 

we need to adopt a set of global laws that govern the acceptable actions of mankind

 

for instance - in some countries,

it is acceptable for a girl of less than 10 years old to be married

to drive a car with no driving licence

to hold 50 pounds of explosives in your own home

 

laws not only govern but protect the public

 

I then said:

 

Tell you what. How about I see that working in our country before expanding it globally?

 

You then said:

 

Take a look at the last two of my previous statements and then take a look at your response

 

I then said:

 

I am very happy to talk you through all of this one step at a time. First things first, are you saying that my response to all of what you said here should simply be based on the last two lines of what you said? If not, then why are you focusing on the last two lines of what you said in relation to my response? Please, answer me this question and I will be happy to assist you further.

 

You have not responded.

 

 

 

The whole context of this thread is about a NWO and if it could work. I made clear comments, in response to one of your posts, that if we couldn't get along in the U.K. it wouldn't be a good idea going any bigger. You then seize on a couple of comments in your post, where you broadly illustrated anomalies in national laws, and claim that I am supportive of those comments. You then say I should be on the 'Sex Offenders Register'. How can anyone come up with stuff like that? Absolutely insane is all I can say. To sum up, you have still not answered why my response to all of what you said in that post should simply be based on the last two lines of what you said. If you would care to explain yourself I will be happy to assist you futher. I have reported your comments, as they are vile, disgusting and clearly not representative of anything I have said. You are clearly not 'right' at all, especially obsessing about marriage between 10 year olds.

 

P.S. A tip if I may, writing in bright colours doesn't make you any more authentic.

Edited February 5, 2010 by renegotiation

[renegotiation]

At what point did I mention banks and governments my dear? I have not engaged in discussing your opinions in any detail (at all), and I will not, as I do not wish to get drawn into your debate, which is quite clearly what you are trying to bait people to do. If other people take the bait, so be it. I didn't mention either, lol, so I find your reply quite amuzing.

 

I said:

 

If you think banks don't own governments, then I would suggest you think again. If we disagree, then we disagree.

 

Then you said:

 

I do believe that everybody has a right to their opinion, I have to say when it comes to this conspiracy theory type stuff I have the patience of a stuffed llama.

 

This is a thread about banks owning governments, which some people call conspiracy theory. If you then come on to the thread and say 'this conspiracy theory type stuff' you must know what the thread is about or you wouldn't be in a position to label it as 'conspiracy theory type stuff' in the first place. By coming on the thread and saying that you 'are' engaging with my opinions. You then say I am baiting, but it is 'you' that has come on to this thread making bizarre comments. I am lost for words.

 

 

 

You were clearly not getting the sarcasm and tounge in cheekness of what I did say sweetie!! My household is a very happy one my dear, very open minded and full of different opinions , but thank you for your concern, it's quite touching .

 

I am genuinely glad to hear it and I was a little concerned.

 

 

 

I think it's you who is possibly paranoid. Bless you, so many worries, so little time to spread them.

 

Well, I disagree. I think it is you who is paranoid.

 

 

 

I have decided to leave this thread to let it have it's natural peacefull passing. It's the right thing to do

 

Going by the soundness of your previous logic I wouldn't be at all surprised to see you back soon. I am not being sarcastic in the slightest. This post is slightly less unhinged than Beck's post, but not by much.

[renegotiation]

I am trying to have some serious debate. Where do these people come from?

[steven4064]

I would suggest that you all read each others' posts very carefully before replying. Irony is very easy to miss in a written post.

 

I would also suggest that you all refrain from personal comments.

 

These are just suggestions but, if you take no notice, I will pull the whole thread

[renegotiation]

Right, now this has been dealt with appropriately I will be happy to address any intelligent comments. Any further insane and unhinged posts will also be reported. I have rarely done this, if ever, since being on CAG I believe. Thank you.

Edited February 5, 2010 by renegotiation

[renegotiation]

Well you certainly chopped my previous post up.....so let's have a look then

 

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Beck1968

Firstly I will use your own words.......

if it is all here 'already', then why are they pushing so damn hard for more political union

 

The fact is you, me and every other member of the human race on this planet need to get along, or not only will we kill Ourselves, but all the other species on this planet.

 

we need to adopt a set of global laws that govern the acceptable actions of mankind

 

for instance - in some countries,

it is acceptable for a girl of less than 10 years old to be married

to drive a car with no driving licence

to hold 50 pounds of explosives in your own home

 

laws not only govern but protect the public

 

Tell you what. How about I see that working in our country before expanding it globally? Furthermore, I take it you are of the opinion that the people should have no say in this?

 

Take a look at the last two of my previous statements and then take a look at your response

 

I am very happy to talk you through all of this one step at a time. First things first, are you saying that my response to all of what you said should simply be based on the last two lines of what you said? If not, then why are you focusing on the last two lines of what you said in relation to my response? Please, answer me this question and I will happy to assist you further.

 

Further explained by:

 

The whole context of this thread is about a NWO and if it could work. I made clear comments, in response to one of your posts, that if we couldn't get along in the U.K. it wouldn't be a good idea going any bigger. You then seize on a couple of comments in your post, where you broadly illustrated anomalies in national laws, and claim that I am supportive of those comments.

 

As I thought, you won't answer the question.

 

I believe this is where we were if you have anything further to add.

Edited February 5, 2010 by renegotiation

[Beck1968]

Right, now this has been dealt with appropriately I will be happy to address any intelligent comments. Any further insane and unhinged posts will also be reported. I have rarely done this, if ever, since being on CAG I believe. Thank you.

 

 

As such this is not a "Debate", it is nothing more that a renegotiation of the renegotiation by renegotiation when anybody dares to pose a view other that one that renegotiation has renegotiated by renegotiating with renegotiation in five of the last six posts

 

as for the above quotation, it just seems to be yet another self serving renegotiation of this thread

 

I find this line in particular quite funny "any further insane and unhinged posts will also be reported"

 

apart from Mungypup and Uncle Tez, the only other subscriber to this thread is now renegotiation, renegotiating with renegotiation on how to further renegotiate this thread into some sort of renegotiation of all the above negotiations

[renegotiation]

As such this is not a "Debate", it is nothing more that a renegotiation of the renegotiation by renegotiation when anybody dares to pose a view other that one that renegotiation has renegotiated by renegotiating with renegotiation in five of the last six posts.

 

It is not a debate because you seem incapable of debate. I asked you an incredibly straightforward question which you refuse to answer. Two of those five posts were direct responses to Mungypup and yourself, two were directly related to your insane and unhinged comments that led to a moderator appearing on this thread. The fifth was asking if you wished to proceed with sensible deate or not. Therefore, if it wasn't for your unhinged and insane comments three of those five posts wouldn't even exist. As I said, the other two posts were simply standard responses to previous posts, which is how a thread works unless i'm mistaken? Please tell me if you think I am wrong. I can proceed with the thread, happily too, if you answer the question. Here it is again:

 

I am very happy to talk you through all of this one step at a time. First things first, are you saying that my response to all of what you said should simply be based on the last two lines of what you said? If not, then why are you focusing on the last two lines of what you said in relation to my response? Please, answer me this question and I will happy to assist you further.

 

I would say it is you that has a very serious problem with anyone daring to present a view different to anything you disagree with. You seem to lose the plot and call them 'sex offenders'. Yes, that does really speak for itself doesn't it.

 

 

 

as for the above quotation, it just seems to be yet another self serving renegotiation of this thread

 

Incorrect i'm afraid, it is simply a statement that welcomes intelligent debate and warns against insane and unhinged comments.

 

 

 

I find this line in particular quite funny "any further insane and unhinged posts will also be reported"

 

It doesn't surprise me at all that you find it funny. It seems to be the sort of person that you are.

 

 

 

apart from Mungypup and Uncle Tez, the only other subscriber to this thread is now renegotiation, renegotiating with renegotiation on how to further renegotiate this thread into some sort of renegotiation of all the above negotiations

 

Oh, you are not subscribed to this thread? I wouldn't have guessed it. Anyone is welcome to subscribe to this thread for intelligent debate. Insane and unhinged comments are not welcome. I am simply replying to posts made by others, not talking to myself as you have alleged. I suggest that you carefully reread the thread in full and you will see this. You are just making yourself look worse now. I would suggest you cut your losses. I reiterate, if you want to come back with intelligent debate you are very welcome. Making a lengthy statement and then basing my entire response on two comments within that statement is not intelligent debate. Being politely asked about this approach and not offering a response is not intelligent debate. Being politely asked about this approach for a second time and resorting to calling someone a 'sex offender' is not intelligent debate. I am actually very glad that Steven has left your wild comments on show, as folk will be able to see I am quite right in everything I have said. My question is perfectly valid within the context of intelligent debate; whereas your responses are not. It is crystal clear. How you act is your choice. Please take some responsibility. I will not sink to your level. I am happy to engage in intelligent debate.

 

P.S. Another tip if I may, writing in varying sizes of bold text doesn't make you any more authentic either.

[Tezcatlipoca]

You seem to lose the plot and call them 'sex offenders'. Yes, that does really speak for itself doesn't it.

 

and resorting to calling someone a 'sex offender' is not intelligent debate.

 

Almost as bad as resorting to inferring somebody is a 'Nazi' because you have no intelligent response to their criticism, I'd say...

 

You see, I suspect the problem many people have with some of your behaviour, renegotiation, is that you seem to only be interested in saying the same old things over and over.

Being unable to deviate from your mantra, you make a show of pseudo-intellect when you are criticised, but inevitably resort to the same old chilidish and ad-hominem statements ("You have my sympathies", "It doesn't surprise me at all that you find it funny. It seems to be the sort of person that you are", etc.), neither of which do your position any good and both of which are a long way from the intelligent debater you feel the need to tell us all you are.

 

I think Beck1968's delivery and content could be clearer, for me anyway, and the reference to sex offenses is just unnecessary, but I do see what ze is saying; that this thread is not so much a debate as a platform for you to continually repeat yourself.

People haven't responded to your thread because they're too ignorant, as you so often seem to suggest. They haven't responded because they either have no opinion on it, or, just possibly, they're not interested in what you have to say.

That's not personal; it's just the nature of threads, especially those in a place as busy as the Bear Garden.

 

Where it becomes a problem, and draws personal criticism, is when you refuse to let the thread die off and continue to bang on about the subject matter. That doesn't help your position or make it any more tenable. It just annoys people.

 

If you feel aggrieved that people are only using this thread to level criticism at you, renegotiation, then stop providing them with ammunition by keeping it alive. If people want to don their tin-foil hats and discuss the New World Order, they will. But if they don't, or don't respond in the way you want them to, the sensible thing would be to let the thread die off naturally instead of...

 

Edited February 6, 2010 by Tezcatlipoca

[renegotiation]

I am happy to engage in intelligent debate.