“Christ is king”

[Dec27]

You expect a slick answer, not an honest one?
And you immediately accuse him of lying, before he's answered. If you responded to me like that, I wouldn't even give you the satisfaction of notification of receipt of your post. I'd metaphorically bin it.

Have you tried a bit of introspection?

The post in the pic is the “lie” I referenced.

Yeah and as stated I don’t expect an apology or honest response. Just a bit of slick waffle.

Hopefully that clears up my position

 

[noseall]

Trolling another attempt to trash a thread.

Standard.

Meanwhile all those lackwits that didn't read your opening posts and have bizarrely reported them for whatever reason, can still read the inoffensive posts. Not a shred of antisemitism or 'Jew hatred' to be seen.

The wait goes on....

 

[Odds]

As far as I am aware having two usernames is not allowed,
So your accusation, and trying to garner support for your accusation, is as good as accusing another poster of breaking the rules. Obviously with the hope of getting them banned because of your incorrect suspicion.

Similar to aveatry's attempt to have me banned because he'd decided, unilaterally, that anyone who is not in the UK is not allowed to participate.
Even if it were true, either that I was not in UK, or the site does not allow participation from abroad, it's not his decision to make.

For yours and aveatry's interest, UK is not at war. He doesn't have any say on that either.

I'm guessing that if you have such suspicions. that another user has more than one user name, the correct process is to report the post, posted by one or both usernames.
Not to mount a public harassment campaign against both, or more, (or one ) user.

nwgs and bod are at least two who would fail that particular test.

 

[King Billy]

The post in the pic is the “lie” I referenced.

Indulge me.
Are you saying that requests for personal info is not prohibited?
Or are you saying that trolling not being allowed was a lie?
Or are you saying that nwgs (Who is he?) has not been persistently attacking whoever it was they were attacking? Or that he wasn't trolling?
Or that it's not good riddance?
Please explain.

Yeah and as stated I don’t expect an apology or honest response. Just a bit of slick waffle.

Yeah, and as i responded, so why bother asking?

Hopefully that clears up my position

Not really.
It just helps me to ask specific questions to which your answers might clear up your position.

 

[Odds]

There're several interesting aspects to these developments within the ranks of the GoP that will affect the forthcoming midterm elections, for instance, as well as American attitudes to the Middle east and their relationship with Israel in the long term. The longer these wars go on, the problems increase for this administration, and while revelations from the Epstein Files continue to overshadow Trump, Christians of the MAGA movement will question their allegiance as the 2028 election comes in to sharper focus after the results of the midterms are cast.

The rise of antisemitism within the GoP should ring alarm bells for everyone, regardless of political allegiance, since the chances of another four years of Republican government is still very real.

 

[pete01]

You sound a lot like pete. Some of your comments are exactly what I would expect Pete would say.

Reported

And Think on...

 

[Dec27]

Yes you do boyo.


View attachment 409865

Please explain what personal information I’ve been looking for?

A slick answer is expected. But not an honest one

And I’ve reported it “for all the good it will do” out rights lies and slander. But as @noseall has stated-He can say what he likes!!

As expected @noseall spouting more baseless lies.

The wait goes on….

 

[morqthana]

Revelling that you are not posting from the UK is not personal information.

And false allegations are not revelations.

I am sure the mods and owners would be interested to know if a poster was actually a foreign actor paid to post rubbish and to agitate wherever they can- espicually in a time of war.

But would they be interested in your lies?

 

[MNW67]

Look at these poll numbers. OMG

Fishback is tapping into an increasingly radicalized generation of Republicans. In December, the conservative Manhattan Institute found that 31 percent of Republicans under 50 identify their own views as racist, and 25 percent say their views are antisemitic. For those over 50, it’s only 4 percent for each. The same survey showed that a majority of Republican men under 50 think that the Holocaust either didn’t happen or was exaggerated.

https://www.nytimes.com/2026/03/12/opinion/james-fishback-gen-z-republican-florida.html

 

[Dec27]

Indulge me.
Are you saying that requests for personal info is not prohibited?
Or are you saying that trolling not being allowed was a lie?
Or are you saying that nwgs (Who is he?) has not been persistently attacking whoever it was they were attacking? Or that he wasn't trolling?
Or that it's not good riddance?
Please explain.



Yeah, and as i responded, so why bother asking?


Not really.
It just helps me to ask specific questions to which your answers might clear up your position.

You’d think with all the effort you put in, you might get a bite. But sadly you never seem to!!

As for your questions, if you don’t understand it, that’s ok by me. I think everyone else does and plenty agree.

@noseall ’s silence is deafening!!

 

[King Billy]

You’d think with all the effort you put in, you might get a bite. But sadly you never seem to!!

I take that to mean you don't have a sensible response.

As for your questions, if you don’t understand it, that’s ok by me. I think everyone else does and plenty agree.

How can I not understand my own questions?
If you do, as you claim to, perhaps you could provide some answers?

Indulge me.
Are you saying that requests for personal info is not prohibited?
Or are you saying that trolling not being allowed was a lie?
Or are you saying that nwgs (Who is he?) has not been persistently attacking whoever it was they were attacking? Or that he wasn't trolling?
Or that it's not good riddance?
Please explain.

Or are the answers too difficult for you to face?

 

[Dec27]

I take that to mean you don't have a sensible response.


How can I not understand my own questions?
If you do, as you claim to, perhaps you could provide some answers?

Or are the answers too difficult for you to face?

It was a simple post, if you can’t understand it, that’s not my issue.

No one else has an issue with it.

 

[King Billy]

It was a simple post,

It wasn't it threw up multiple possibilites.

if you can’t understand it, that’s not my issue.

I could interpret it in many ways, which is why I asked you to be more explicit.

No one else has an issue with it.

I was the only one paying attention to your post, and could be bothered to ask you for more explanation, more like.
I see you decline to be more explicit, realising that there was a multiplicity of meanings to your comment, which you prefer not to address.

 

[Dec27]

It wasn't it threw up multiple possibilites.


I could interpret it in many ways, which is why I asked you to be more explicit.


I was the only one paying attention to your post, and could be bothered to ask you for more explanation, more like.
I see you decline to be more explicit, realising that there was a multiplicity of meanings to your comment, which you prefer not to address.

Not at all. I think you’ve either taken it out of context, aren’t able to comprehend a simple post, or it’s a poor attempt at Trolling.

Take you pick

 

[King Billy]

aren’t able to comprehend a simple post,

I'm not able to understand what you thought was a simple post because it had a multitude of meanings.
For instance "Eats shoots and leaves" could be a simple sentence.
But it could also have many different interpretations. Perhaps some the author didn't intend.
So your simple sentence might appear simple to you because you saw it as a simple sentence. I saw it as having many interpretation which is why I asked you to indicate which interpretation you meant.
Now as you're not prepared to explain, I can only assume that I saw an interpretation which you did not. And now you are too embarrassed to explain.
I asked you:

Indulge me.
Are you saying that requests for personal info is not prohibited?
Or are you saying that trolling not being allowed was a lie?
Or are you saying that nwgs (Who is he?) has not been persistently attacking whoever it was they were attacking? Or that he wasn't trolling?
Or that it's not good riddance?
Please explain.

And this is the post I was referring to:

The post in the pic is the “lie” I referenced.

And this was the pic you referred to:

Or is that Noseall referred to Nwgs, and you self-identified as nwgs.
Now you've realised your mistake, you want to avoid confirming that you are or were the troll nwgs?

Your bizarre behaviour and subsequent conduct creates many questions as to your understanding of the trail of the thread and/or your previous identities.