Reason No. 398,285 why it's not good to have your club owned by a Petro-Oligarch

[fiordearg]

The only reason I'd laugh at us being taken over by a rich state is that United supporters would lose it altogether. Seriously it's unethical though

[Crimson Dynasty]

1) I brought up Trump/Obama and how people react to their rivals policy when presented as their own, and their reactions. I brought up tate to show how someone can use a word to describe someone, and not be able to explain it. Misogyny is quite a common word to hear.
Tate supports women milking losers for money via their pussy, I don't think prostitution is good for either party.

You mean "SOME" people......or to use your own words......"a FEW" (women)

Which again begs the question, what was your point when you were essentially cherry-picking an example to suit.....whatever argument it is you were making, while essentially choosing outliers as you're doing so?

2) bring up the full piece you are talking about please.
Slaves can risk their lives to be free, some through fighting their captors, some through escaping to safeground elsewhere- this also had a risk of punishment torture/death.
I wonder if Ye was talking about mental slavery, but as said not sure what you were specifically on about.

Which is broken? Your Google or your fingers?

https://googlethatforyou.com?q=Kanye%20West%20Slavery%20is %20a%20choice%20comments

You can't do things for yourself and have to have others do your research for you, even while you're confident in what Kanye meant when he said that but can't even be bothered to find out exactly what it was?

(Spoiler alert : Kanye apologized for those comments and took them back. So why the hell you feel the need to make excuses for them or try to explain them on his behalf is anyone's guess.)

3) I talk about black/blacks as I'm talking about people of a race routinely referred to as black.
9 million dead folk from hunger, are mostly in subsaharan Africa and are black, not African American.
In my experience black is preffered by most. But then I meet more Africans than Americans.
BLM stands for BlackLivesMatter, maybe you should start calling them out over their use of black to describe black people. Or the PL for promoting racsim through the use of "Black" Lives Matter.

You sure do say some dumb stupid things, don't you?
And the worst part is that you actually believe that tripe.

4) eugencists introduced abortion. I've given a good breakdown, of something I don't support that is verifiable in data and detailed on previous pages.
If it saves lives how many more deaths were there in the UK with 185,000 less abortions per year a little more than a half century ago?

Source?

You know what? Don't bother.
I know for a fact that abortion has existed as a practice in various human societies for far longer than Eugenics has as a practice.

So making the claim that eugenicists introduced it, is...um.......what's the technical expression?.....ah yes...

Bullshite.

5) can't help you with that,
like your selection for me as a tate fan but not also an obama/trump fan, you seem to struggle with discussions. You drag what you need from these statements. (I do think trump was the best western leader in my lifetime, so trump fan would be fair, though I can accept he's flawed for sure. I'd rather live in a world with twitter people really upset than some more wars and crap foreign policy)
I've given the benefits of 9 million extra blacks being aborted for economic and eugenic benefits. I disagree with it. By explaining it, I don't agree with it.

LOLOLOL!!!!

What a shocker!!!!

And by "shocker" I mean this is the LEAST surprising thing that anyone can possible stand to learn about you, that you're a Trump supporter (or apologist,....or admirer.....or whatever it is you see yourself as in relation to him), given your nonsensical arguments here or even just the mere fact that you truly and genuinely believe .....(**and I want to make sure I get this right**).....that he was....."....the best western leader in {your} lifetime"....about a person who was OBJECTIVELY the worst president the United States of America has ever had.

Don't take my word for it.
Just look at his record :-

- The only president in the history of the country to be impeached TWICE!
- The only president in the history of the country to have gone throughout his entire presidency without once ever had the majority support of Americans or more than 50% approval rating at any point during his presidency.
- The singular and only president in US history to lose the popular vote in his elections TWICE!
- The president who oversaw the greatest job loss (30 million jobs lost) and biggest implosion of the Economy under his watch (tripled the national debt and the national deficit),...thanks mostly to his bungled handling of the COVID pandemic,....a pandemic during which he only managed to get only himself infected, but also duly infected his own wife and son.
What a moron!
- The most objectively LAZIEST person to ever occupy the office given the number of days he took off to play golf.
-And let's not forget the best parts :- a (compulsive and bad) Liar, A bully, a bigot and racist, a sexist, and quite possible the most stupid person to ever occupy ANY public office.

Oh, and also fat.
Very fat.
In an unseemly and unsightly way.

Fat.

So yes, it all makes total sense that you would deem him, ".....the best western leader in {your} lifetime,...."


Indeed.

Hitler didn't like the Jews as richer groups are often perceived to be greedy, and their wealth from oppression.
In terms of class politics this is quite common, the gredy rich and the oppressed poor. BLM presented whites as oppressors, all Ye did is look up to another group. Its the same process different groups.

This is what's known as (not so) backhandedly justifying Hitler's atrocities through the back door.
Just as he did.

Classy.
But then again, like I said - no surprise here.

6) you can take it up with John Barnes, whose said similar and you can find studies that refute the ones I've presented.

John Barnes I' m sure can think for himself and doesn't always point to other people that said a thing, that he's challenged to defend instead of defending it himself.

You should try it sometime.

And for the record, this may come as a surprise or a shock to you, but Barnesy was wrong.

I realize in your mind you thought that as long as you can point to a black person that made a bad or incorrect assessment about racism, that that was all the permission you needed to make the same bad argument.
Sort of like the rhetorical "...but I have a black friend who agrees with me that racism doesn't exist"

And I'm sure like you, if I tried hard enough, I can definitely find and cherry-pick all sorts of studies to support whatever nonsensical beliefs I may hold or bad arguments I make.

It still wouldn't make them any less wrong.

Which why I reiterate again, you should try defending your own arguments without pointing to what some other person said (typically a black person or a minority whom you use as a shield for your crappy arguments), or any of the many "studies" and "research papers" you've found that just happen to support you (while ignoring the hundreds more that disagree with you)

[Insidious]

Twat.

https://twitter.com/BBCMOTD/status/1590101859653468160

[Taksin]

If Argentina is permitted to do so, send a team, then it has permission to do so.

So you think when the World Cup comes along, the nation state of Argentina does not feel certain it can go until it gains permission to send a team? (from America, is what your saying - just to be clear)

It’s not qualification. It’s permission

You think there is not a feeling of freedom to make their preparations coursing through the veins of the footballing authorities in Buenos Aires?

You may think there’s a lot to discuss but there is no discussion if you are bloody minded on really simple acknowledgements such as this

[CCTV]

So you think when the World Cup comes along, the nation state of Argentina does not feel certain it can go until it gains permission to send a team? (from America, is what your saying - just to be clear)

It’s not qualification. It’s permission

You think there is not a feeling of freedom to make their preparations coursing through the veins of the footballing authorities in Buenos Aires?

You may think there’s a lot to discuss but there is no discussion if you are bloody minded on really simple acknowledgements such as this

You brought up the sending a football team example. The piece I quoted pages back was not about sending a team to Qatar. As said no longer interesting and I'd suggest you were not going to attend to matters anyway.

[CCTV]

1) you mean "SOME" people......or to use your own words......"a FEW" (women)

Which again begs the question, what was your point when you were essentially cherry-picking an example to suit.....whatever argument it is you were making, while essentially choosing outliers as you're doing so?




Which is broken? Your Google or your fingers?

https://googlethatforyou.com?q=Kanye%20West%20Slavery%20is %20a%20choice%20comments

2) You can't do things for yourself and have to have others do your research for you, even while you're confident in what Kanye meant when he said that but can't even be bothered to find out exactly what it was?

(Spoiler alert : Kanye apologized for those comments and took them back. So why the hell you feel the need to make excuses for them or try to explain them on his behalf is anyone's guess.)



You sure do say some dumb stupid things, don't you?
And the worst part is that you actually believe that tripe.



Source?

3) You know what? Don't bother.
I know for a fact that abortion has existed as a practice in various human societies for far longer than Eugenics has as a practice.

So making the claim that eugenicists introduced it, is...um.......what's the technical expression?.....ah yes...

Bullshite.



LOLOLOL!!!!

What a shocker!!!!

And by "shocker" I mean this is the LEAST surprising thing that anyone can possible stand to learn about you, that you're a Trump supporter (or apologist,....or admirer.....or whatever it is you see yourself as in relation to him), given your nonsensical arguments here or even just the mere fact that you truly and genuinely believe .....(**and I want to make sure I get this right**).....that he was....."....the best western leader in {your} lifetime"....about a person who was OBJECTIVELY the worst president the United States of America has ever had.

Don't take my word for it.
Just look at his record :-

- The only president in the history of the country to be impeached TWICE!
- The only president in the history of the country to have gone throughout his entire presidency without once ever had the majority support of Americans or more than 50% approval rating at any point during his presidency.
- The singular and only president in US history to lose the popular vote in his elections TWICE!
- The president who oversaw the greatest job loss (30 million jobs lost) and biggest implosion of the Economy under his watch (tripled the national debt and the national deficit),...thanks mostly to his bungled handling of the COVID pandemic,....a pandemic during which he only managed to get only himself infected, but also duly infected his own wife and son.
What a moron!
- The most objectively LAZIEST person to ever occupy the office given the number of days he took off to play golf.
-And let's not forget the best parts :- a (compulsive and bad) Liar, A bully, a bigot and racist, a sexist, and quite possible the most stupid person to ever occupy ANY public office.

4) Oh, and also fat.
Very fat.
In an unseemly and unsightly way.

Fat.

So yes, it all makes total sense that you would deem him, ".....the best western leader in {your} lifetime,...."


Indeed.



5) This is what's known as (not so) backhandedly justifying Hitler's atrocities through the back door.
Just as he did.

Classy.
But then again, like I said - no surprise here.





John Barnes I' m sure can think for himself and doesn't always point to other people that said a thing, that he's challenged to defend instead of defending it himself.

You should try it sometime.

And for the record, this may come as a surprise or a shock to you, but Barnesy was wrong.

6) I realize in your mind you thought that as long as you can point to a black person that made a bad or incorrect assessment about racism, that that was all the permission you needed to make the same bad argument.
Sort of like the rhetorical "...but I have a black friend who agrees with me that racism doesn't exist"

And I'm sure like you, if I tried hard enough, I can definitely find and cherry-pick all sorts of studies to support whatever nonsensical beliefs I may hold or bad arguments I make.

It still wouldn't make them any less wrong.

Which why I reiterate again, you should try defending your own arguments without pointing to what some other person said (typically a black person or a minority whom you use as a shield for your crappy arguments), or any of the many "studies" and "research papers" you've found that just happen to support you (while ignoring the hundreds more that disagree with you)

Sorry mate buy you are just too silly, you said black was OK for MalcolmX Jim Crow, what was I up to ? You posted BLM yourself and the B stands for Black Lives Matter.

1) group think is very common based on identity. Its not a few people. The example of the misogyny was to show how strong it is, saying things you cannot explain.

2) science is greater than 1 person, 1 nation. Irish chose to fight on occasion, would take a break and give it another go. They didn't need Einsteins theories of relativity, fighting predated modern science.

3) OK, don't look at US history.

4) omg "you" have 'literally' killed Trump with your "body shaming". #SoNotBodyPositive

5) if you know anything about Hitler, that is a matter of fact underlying his politics. If explaining bad things means you must support them, I guess one shouldn't talk about bad things and then hope for the best. That's not for me.
Fear of being labelled a Hitler supporter is not too great a concern for me, as I don't support Hitler.
Your little insinuations are just silly. Black Lives Matter - stop saying black you racist. That all "you".

6) I've given you several studies that show racial bias is present in large cohorts. If you want to have one of your arguments about it, fine, don't look at the studies.

[Taksin]

You brought up the sending a football team example. The piece I quoted pages back was not about sending a team to Qatar. As said no longer interesting and I'd suggest you were not going to attend to matters anyway.

You've accused me of self contradiction. I used this as an example to illustrate where your definition of a self contradiction is wrong. You are equivocating on the term 'free' in order to avoid being honest. If you were being honest you would admit that I did not in fact contradict myself, it was you who was changing the definition of what a self contradiction was.

If you can't be honest about basic definitions, accusations and logical rules, what point is there in tending to other matters? This is the matter that was being tended to, I am facing it in the way an honest person would. If you could unequivocally concede that I did not contradict myself, then we would be making progress.

Without that, or without showing that I did contradict myself, not progress can be made. The fact that you find it no longer interesting is just avoidance.

[CCTV]

Why do a lot of your discussions on a couple of different threads centre around LGBTQISM?

I wonder vin why talking about lgbtq issues is concerning or of note ? I think people tend to be concerned when their symbols are scrutinised, for me thats a little bit religious.
I think some of my issues with lgbtq are clear and presented fairly. So let's revisit one.

I don't think lgbtq/blm should be used to protect the person who knows they have hiv/aids and doesn't inform the person who ends up contracting it.
I think that is a cruel behaviour, and the law should protect the disproportionately black/lgbtq person whose the victim of such behaviour, not the offenders also disproportionately black/gay.

A quick Google/other search of hiv/aids law reform in California should bring the relevant articles in the top results.

Were you aware of this lgbtq/blm activism ?

If any pro-lgbtq folk want to say if that was the correct decision, or not, fire away.

BLM/LGBTQ cited in this social justice reform.
Do you support law reforms that reduce sentencing drastically in effect, to protect black/gay who infected the uninformed black/gay.
The cause as cited was an overrepresentation of black/gay convicted. It's not like this can't occur in other groups.
It's an issue of principle rather than a straight v gay, or white v black issue. A straight white/asian man or woman, can do this to the other.
For me this issue is like the lunacy behind the police/home office and Rotherham girls. Where social justice aimed to fail the victims in favour of offenders, because police were concerned about being labelled racist apparently.

[CCTV]

You've accused me of self contradiction. I used this as an example to illustrate where your definition of a self contradiction is wrong. You are equivocating on the term 'free' in order to avoid being honest. If you were being honest you would admit that I did not in fact contradict myself, it was you who was changing the definition of what a self contradiction was.

If you can't be honest about basic definitions, accusations and logical rules, what point is there in tending to other matters? This is the matter that was being tended to, I am facing it in the way an honest person would. If you could unequivocally concede that I did not contradict myself, then we would be making progress.

Without that, or without showing that I did contradict myself, not progress can be made. The fact that you find it no longer interesting is just avoidance.

You have arguments continuously with Steveo where ye disagree. Disagreement is fine.
Are you suggesting Steveo fulfills your criteria for discussion ?

You constantly avoid topics I bring up. I dont believe you're being honest. You don't attend to matters and pretend like you could or would.

If you are sincere, prove your worth and attend to them despite my supposed avoidance and failings.

[Taksin]

Are you suggesting Steveo fulfills your criteria for discussion ?

No I don't but I'm talking to you so that's irrelevant.

You constantly avoid topics I bring up. I dont believe you're being honest. You don't attend to matters and pretend like you could or would.

If you are sincere, prove your worth and attend to them despite my supposed avoidance and failings.

I've told you that I consider many of your topics on this thread not only irrelevant but bizarrely irrelevant. I've shown you clearly that this isn't just a matter of opinion, it is reflected in the topic widely - as expressed in the BBC article about Qatar reflecting the European footballing community's attitude towards human rights.

I've even told you that you have no argument essentially from me on the topic of arbortion, for example, but that it is irrelevant to the discussion. So I have already tended to your meandering, solipsistic, obsessive quest to describe the moral landscape. I'm not interested in thrashing out the details of the moral landscape with you - I'm interested in describing what happens in Sports Washing. Not what happens in your head.

You came close to admitting you were wrong to accuse me of contradicting myself - I didn't - but then at the last minute you equivocated using a semantic slight of hand, as if that proves your point, and you subsequently claimed it wasn't important and it wasn't interesting - both as ways to avoid the simple act of setting the record straight.

That's dishonest and insincere. There's no getting away from that unless you still want to claim I contradicted myself. Until you clarify, there is no moving on.