Tommy Robinson fight back against BBC corruption

Status
Not open for further replies.
Put that in a context that makes sense.


Perhaps you will give us your version of what you think is racism?
Sodthisforfun is unwilling to provide her version.
Shame you don't put racism into context.

You were so busy judging me and thinking I was racist that you didn't ever take on board my other posts about racism.
It's fair to say that a normal, level-headed person can see that I have never written anything racist, nor condoned racism.
 
Sponsored Links
Shame you don't put racism into context.
I've posted my interpretation of racism. It's the same as the one in the dictionary.
Will you give us yours?
Or do you want it to remain a secret so that you can reserve the right alone to decide what is racism?



... you didn't ever take on board my other posts about racism.
I did mention your comment to the Tommy Robinson supporters reunion.
Since I've been here, that is the only stand you have taken.
But compared to the circular arguments that you use to try and prevent the exposing of racism, a) it is very recent, and b) it is one example against multiple examples
Perhaps it indicates a change of heart. I do hope so.


It's fair to say that a normal, level-headed person can see that I have never written anything racist, nor condoned racism.
I haven't accused you of writing anything explicitly racist.
I repeatedly suggest that you must be racist, if you want to prevent others from exposing racism, but you are unwilling to define racism.

To be more explicit. you want to stop people exposing racism, you want to reserve the right alone to decide what is racist, but you are unwilling to provide your version of racism.
As in the analogies I presented, it is reasonable to assume you condone racism.
 
Questioning the oh-so-common and incorrect usage of the word RACIST does NOT mean someone is racist. Please prove to me where it does. Give me proof, not your incorrect ramblings, but proof.

If you wish to keep believing it and insulting me to say that I am a racist then that shows yourself up to be a terribly stupid and small-minded man.

It also proves to me that you simply do not understand the word racist and what person or situation it should apply to. Not one iota and it proves again that my questioning of the word racist was indeed the correct thing to do.
 
Questioning the oh-so-common and incorrect usage of the word RACIST does NOT mean someone is racist. Please prove to me where it does. Give me proof, not your incorrect ramblings, but proof.

If you wish to keep believing it and insulting me to say that I am a racist then that shows yourself up to be a terribly stupid and small-minded man.

It also proves to me that you simply do not understand the word racist and what person or situation it should apply to. Not one iota and it proves again that my questioning of the word racist was indeed the correct thing to do.
As you continually refuse to define racism, you obviously do not know what racism is. Therefore you cannot argue what it is or isn't.
On that basis, if you keep arguing that that which I and BAS expose as racism, is not racism, then you are condoning racism.

I see you are resorting to your abusive behaviour again. We don't need to wonder why anymore.
 
Sponsored Links
As you continually refuse to define racism, you obviously do not know what racism is. Therefore you cannot argue what it is or isn't.
On that basis, if you keep arguing that that which I and BAS expose as racism, is not racism, then you are condoning racism.

I see you are resorting to your abusive behaviour again. We don't need to wonder why anymore.
Going by the fact that you think someone questioning the definition of the word and you saying that I am racist, you clearly have zero understanding.

Edited to add: Calling someone racist when they are not is insulting and in your own terms, abusive.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
So you agree with Oxford dictionary definition:
prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race
Absolutely. It is the same definition that I have previously posted.
As we know, there is only one human race. Therefore the dictionary is using the socially constructed concpt of ‘race’.
Which includes ethnicities, nationalities, cultures , etc.
Thus racism is the socially constructed definition, which includes prejudice, etc between ethnicities, nationalities, cultures, etc.
It was this definition and concept that sodthisforfun and EFLImpudence argue cannot apply. Their argument that racism is not racism is based on their flawed understanding of the concept of race.
Thus, they do not know, and cannot recognise racism when it occurs. But they want to prevent the exposure of racism.
Now will either of them offer their understanding of racism?
 
But they want to prevent the exposure of racism.
Now will either of them offer their understanding of racism?
Again, I've asked before. Show me where myself or ELF have ever tried to prevent the exposure of racism.

Think, really think about this.
 
Absolutely. It is the same definition that I have previously posted.
As we know, there is only one human race. Therefore the dictionary is using the socially constructed concpt of ‘race’.
Which includes ethnicities, nationalities, cultures , etc.
Thus racism is the socially constructed definition, which includes prejudice, etc between ethnicities, nationalities, cultures, etc.
It was this definition and concept that sodthisforfun and EFLImpudence argue cannot apply. Their argument that racism is not racism is based on their flawed understanding of the concept of race.
Thus, they do not know, and cannot recognise racism when it occurs. But they want to prevent the exposure of racism.
Now will either of them offer their understanding of racism?

All totally incorrect.

Oxford dictionary says no such thing.
 
Again, I've asked before. Show me where myself or ELF have ever tried to prevent the exposure of racism.

Think, really think about this.
Good God. How many times?
I would happily show you but the threads have been deleted. Obviously, so you can deny exactly what you are now denying.
 
Good God. How many times?
I would happily show you but the threads have been deleted. Obviously, so you can deny exactly what you are now denying.
Exactly, how many times must you lie over what you think I said? It's disgusting, making allegations and that I am a racist. It's very convenient for you to make all sorts of allegations against me without the ability to back it up.
 
Exactly, how many times must you lie over what you think I said? It's disgusting, making allegations and that I am a racist. It's very convenient for you to make all sorts of allegations against me without the ability to back it up.
It’s very convenient that threads have been deleted so you can deny trying to prevent the exposure of racism. If they still existed you could not deny it.
 
rofl.gif
rofl.gif
rofl5.gif

rofl5.gif
rofl.gif
rofl.gif

rofl.gif
rofl5.gif
rofl.gif
BAS IQ...10
 
It’s very convenient that threads have been deleted so you can deny trying to prevent the exposure of racism. If they still existed you could not deny it.
Irrelevant if threads are there, you'd not be able to prove any such thing because it didn't happen.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Sponsored Links
Back
Top