REFERENDUM RESULTS AND DISCUSSION THREAD

[visage]

Great moderating, instead of pulling up an EU supporter who quiet clearly lied about what I had said, your response in your very next post is to blame me for the quality of the thread

Shame on you, Vis. Shame on you.

I didnt blame you. I merely mentioned two contemporaneous events. Any inference that I was linking the two is entirely in your head.

Please don't make things up, that I have said and then have the audacity to insinuate, it is me who is the liar!!!

 

[The Saturday Boy]

The posts are in front of everyone's eyes. You insinuated I was blaming the EU. You purposely missed half of the sentence out, that blamed the Conservative and Labour party.
It is there, you said it, you made it up and then said I was being disingenuous or at worst I was a liar. If you had of put my whole sentence down, it was obvious I was not blaming the EU. Why not $#@!ing apologise? Instead of a childish, "I will do what I please".

You wrote...

Quite a decent post, although I don't think that any government would have increased our manufacturing base, while we were in the EU.

So the reason why no government would have increased our manufacturing base was because we were in the EU - the inference here is that you think government would have done so were in not for the fact that we were in the EU. It is a reasonable inference to make when a/ you mentioned the EU b/ on a thread about the EU.

You then went onto post "since we have been in the EU". So that is twice where you have linked our decline in manufacturing to our membership of the EU...if it was not relevant to the point you were making, why mention the EU at all? So I stand by my initial reading and that you blame our decline in manufacturing on our membership of the EU and nothing you have subsequently written changes my view on that.

 

[thehistorymakers]

You wrote...



So the reason why no government would have increased our manufacturing base was because we were in the EU - the inference here is that you think government would have done so were in not for the fact that we were in the EU. It is a reasonable inference to make when a/ you mentioned the EU b/ on a thread about the EU.

You then went onto post "since we have been in the EU". So that is twice where you have linked our decline in manufacturing to our membership of the EU...if it was not relevant to the point you were making, why mention the EU at all? So I stand by my initial reading and that you blame our decline in manufacturing on our membership of the EU and nothing you have subsequently written changes my view on that.

You are making it worst. You didn't quote that post, you quoted the answer to Keefs post, "Why". I answered quite clearly


"Because since we have been in the EU, both the Conservative party and Labour party have both been responsible for the disappearance of most of our manufacturing base."

Your next post said this,

"No, you said "since we joined the EU" - most readers would see that as a clear link between the demise of our manufacturing and joining the EU. You are being at best disingenuous at worst lying when you say you aren't blaming the EU".


it is there for everyone to see. You said I was insinuating that the EU was to blame, because I said,

" Since we have been in the EU"

If you had of put the whole sentence,

Because since we have been in the EU, both the Conservative party and Labour party have both been responsible for the disappearance of most of our manufacturing base."

IT IS FUCKING OBVIOUS I WAS BLAMING THE CONSERVATIVE AND LABOUR PARTY.

You made up what I said, suggested I was a liar and got caught with your pants down and your reply is I will do what I please.

Like I said, childish and you lose my respect.

 

[thehistorymakers]

I didnt blame you. I merely mentioned two contemporaneous events. Any inference that I was linking the two is entirely in your head.

Please don't make things up, that I have said and then have the audacity to insinuate, it is me who is the liar!!!

You said since I joined this thread the quality has gone down. Immediately after the Saturday Boy had lied what I had said and I pointed it out. Maybe as a mod you should show a bit of impartiality and don't attack the poster immediately after he pulls up an EU supporter like yourself. Moderate people manipulating other people's posts and lying about what I wrote. You are making yourself look quite silly and a completely bent moderator.

 

[visage]

Do I need to draw it in crayon?

 

[Tyrannosaurus Dan]

it is there for everyone to see. You said I was insinuating that the EU was to blame, because I said,

" Since we have been in the EU"

If you had of put the whole sentence,

Because since we have been in the EU, both the Conservative party and Labour party have both been responsible for the disappearance of most of our manufacturing base."

IT IS FUCKING OBVIOUS I WAS BLAMING THE CONSERVATIVE AND LABOUR PARTY.

You made up what I said, suggested I was a liar and got caught with your pants down and your reply is I will do what I please.

Like I said, childish and you lose my respect.

If you weren't trying to imply that being in the EU was to blame in any way then why start your post with "since we have been in the EU"? You could have made the same point without that bit in. It seems fair to me for TSB to come to the conclusion he did. Yet more bizarre ramblings to take away from any reasoned debate in this thread.

 

[thehistorymakers]

If you weren't trying to imply that being in the EU was to blame in any way then why start your post with "since we have been in the EU"? You could have made the same point without that bit in. It seems fair to me for TSB to come to the conclusion he did. Yet more bizarre ramblings to take away from any reasoned debate in this thread.

Because I was answering Keefs question, *Why."


FFS, how can he come to the conclusion, when he purposely missed out the second part of the sentence.

Here is the sentence he got the since from,


"Because since we have been in the EU, both the Conservative party and Labour party have both been responsible for the disappearance of most of our manufacturing base."

If he had quoted my whole sentence, it is fucking obvious, because I actually said the Conservative and Labour Party were responsible and did not blame the EU.

If It had been the other way round and I had done what TSB had done, I would get rightly torn to pieces on here.

The poster should have apologised. That would have been it.

 

[thehistorymakers]

Do I need to draw it in crayon?

No don't bother, you would do the same again, so there is no point.

 

[leedswolf]

because



conjunction

for the reason that; since.

"we did it because we felt it our duty"

synonyms:since,as,for the reason that,in view of the fact that,owing to the fact that,seeing that/as

"his classmates liked him because he was very friendly"

informal

used to introduce a word or phrase that stands for a clause expressing an explanation or reason.

"there's probably somebody out there who would argue the point because Internet"

Middle English: from the phrase by cause, influenced by Old French par cause de ‘by reason of’.

Clear to me that the inference why Labour and Tory governments failed UK manufacturing was because of (due to) the EU.

 

[Deutsch Wolf]

How much simpler can we make this...

If I said "Since Matt Doherty became Wolves' first choice left back, our results have been so poor that we've flitted around the edges of a relegation scrap", everyone would naturally assume I was making a causal link between Event A and Result B. Pretty obvious really, isn't it. For the record, I do make that kind of link and I could evidence how part of it is the beardy twat's fault.

If I said "Since Helder Costa signed for Wolves, our results have been no better than before he was here", everyone would ask me WTF I was on about. Rightly so. It's a factual statement, but the first bit has nothing to do with the second bit.

 

[FrankMunro-371]

I like the way that DW manages to bring Matt Doherty into every thread....

 

[thehistorymakers]

because

bɪˈkɒz/

conjunction

for the reason that; since.

"we did it because we felt it our duty"

synonyms:since,as,for the reason that,in view of the fact that,owing to the fact that,seeing that/as

"his classmates liked him because he was very friendly"

informal

used to introduce a word or phrase that stands for a clause expressing an explanation or reason.

"there's probably somebody out there who would argue the point because Internet"

Read the whole fucking sentence and don't make yourself look a cunt. I blamed the Tory and Labour party in the second clause.

Since I was at School, I have attacked 3 pupils. Nobody in the right mind would think you are blaming the school for attacking 3 pupils.

It is worse because I actually said the Tory and Party were responsible for the decline in our manufacturing base. It is in the second clause. So, to purposely miss out the clause that says the Tory and Party are responsible and make it out as though I was blaming the EU, was wrong and manipulative. Then to call me a liar, when it was the poster who quite clearly was lying, is out of order.

So if you are going to but in, get your facts right and at least try to be decent.

 

[thehistorymakers]

How much simpler can we make this...

If I said "Since Matt Doherty became Wolves' first choice left back, our results have been so poor that we've flitted around the edges of a relegation scrap", everyone would naturally assume I was making a causal link between Event A and Result B. Pretty obvious really, isn't it. For the record, I do make that kind of link and I could evidence how part of it is the beardy $#@!'s fault.

If I said "Since Helder Costa signed for Wolves, our results have been no better than before he was here", everyone would ask me WTF I was on about. Rightly so. It's a factual statement, but the first bit has nothing to do with the second bit.

Incredible, who did I say were responsible for the decline in manufacturing? It is in the second clause of the sentence he quoted from my post.
Because since we have been in the EU, both the Conservative party and Labour party have both been responsible for the disappearance of most of our manufacturing base."

Who am I saying is responsible,? Deutsch.

 

[Deutsch Wolf]

It begs the question why you'd mention the EU at all.

You're correct that it's down to domestic Governments of both hues. So why even include the first bit? It doesn't make any sense.

 

[The Saturday Boy]

Read the whole $#@!ing sentence and don't make yourself look a $#@!. I blamed the Tory and Labour party in the second clause.

Since I was at School, I have attacked 3 pupils. Nobody in the right mind would think you are blaming the school for attacking 3 pupils.

It is worse because I actually said the Tory and Party were responsible for the decline in our manufacturing base. It is in the second clause. So, to purposely miss out the clause that says the Tory and Party are responsible and make it out as though I was blaming the EU, was wrong and manipulative. Then to call me a liar, when it was the poster who quite clearly was lying, is out of order.

So if you are going to but in, get your facts right and at least try to be decent.

Hold on. I haven't lied. This is a thread about the EU, in which you regularly point fingers at the EU for all sorts of things. It is perfectly reasonable for me to assume that since you used the phrase "since we have been in the EU" that you were holding the position that our membership of the EU is the reason for our decline in manufacturing. If the thread had been about the relative merits or otherwise of behaviour management in a school and you had written the phrase above, I would have come to a similar conclusion - that you held the school responsible for not properly managing behaviour, especially if you had spent pages and pages making that point over and over and over and over again.

It was, and remains, my opinion that you drew the link between our membership of the EU and our decline in manufacturing and that you did so consciously. That you have tried to then move away from this position once it was pointed out that it was an absurd position to take and deny you ever meant it that way makes you disingenuous and a liar. In my opinion. I do not feel the need to apologise to you other than to say I am sorry you are back.

 

[thehistorymakers]

It begs the question why you'd mention the EU at all.

You're correct that it's down to domestic Governments of both hues. So why even include the first bit? It doesn't make any sense.

Because I was answering Keefs question, from the post before.
If TSB had written the whole sentence, instead of just the first clause, then there is no argument, he couldn't have insinuated I was a liar, Vis wouldn't have had to get involved. I wouldn't have had to defend myself etc.

He purposely missed the second part of the clause out, where I actually said the Tory Party and Labour Party were responsible for the decline in British manufacturing.

That was a cunts trick.

 

[thehistorymakers]

Hold on. I haven't lied. This is a thread about the EU, in which you regularly point fingers at the EU for all sorts of things. It is perfectly reasonable for me to assume that since you used the phrase "since we have been in the EU" that you were holding the position that our membership of the EU is the reason for our decline in manufacturing. If the thread had been about the relative merits or otherwise of behaviour management in a school and you had written the phrase above, I would have come to a similar conclusion - that you held the school responsible for not properly managing behaviour, especially if you had spent pages and pages making that point over and over and over and over again.

It was, and remains, my opinion that you drew the link between our membership of the EU and our decline in manufacturing and that you did so consciously. That you have tried to then move away from this position once it was pointed out that it was an absurd position to take and deny you ever meant it.

"Because since we have been in the EU, both the Conservative party and Labour party have both been responsible for the disappearance of most of our manufacturing base."

You purposely missed the second part of the clause out, where I actually said, the Tory and Labour party were responsible.

WHY DID YOU MISS THE SECOND PART OF THE CLAUSE OUT?
It is because if you had put the whole sentence, you would not have been able to try to twist what I said.

You look a right cunt. You have no dignity and are acting like a child.

"I will say what I please" twat.

 

[The Saturday Boy]

Because I was answering Keefs question, from the post before.
If TSB had written the whole sentence, instead of just the first clause, then there is no argument, he couldn't have insinuated I was a liar, Vis wouldn't have had to get involved. I wouldn't have had to defend myself etc.

He purposely missed the second part of the clause out, where I actually said the Tory Party and Labour Party were responsible for the decline in British manufacturing.

That was a $#@!s trick.

Twice. Twice you linked the EU to manufacturing. I am not disputing that you mentioned governments, both Tory and Labour, but twice you mentioned that it had happened while we were in the EU and quite clearly suggesting that no government would have done any different while we were in the EU/since we were in the EU.

It is so blatantly obvious what you were suggesting. I don't believe any of your "pity me" explanations that followed.

 

[The Saturday Boy]

"Because since we have been in the EU, both the Conservative party and Labour party have both been responsible for the disappearance of most of our manufacturing base."

You purposely missed the second part of the clause out, where I actually said, the Tory and Labour party were responsible.

WHY DID YOU MISS THE SECOND PART OF THE CLAUSE OUT?
It is because if you had put the whole sentence, you would not have been able to try to twist what I said.

You look a right $#@!. You have no dignity and are acting like a child.

"I will say what I please" $#@!.

I missed out the second clause because it was not relevant to the point I was making. It is still not relevant to the point I am making and it never will be relevant to the point I was making. Even if I had included the second clause, I would not have changed the point I was making. My point stands as is, as I have explained it and as others have recognised.

 

[thehistorymakers]

If I see 10 people eat shit and they all say, we didn't eat shit, it doesn't make it true.

A man without conviction is nobody.