the Migrant Crisis

Ebeneezer Goode

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 17, 2015
Messages
3,657
Reaction score
1,541
Points
113
Supports
England
You, yourself, have been claiming there is a migration crisis. I agree. I think people freezing to death in their thousands in camps around Western and Southern Europe is an atrocity - that people who seventy years ago said "never again" are now saying "well, maybe again, if the alternative is sacrificing a tiny sliver of our prosperity".

The fiction that Europe tells itself is that we are civilised. That's what we convinced ourselves as we conquered the world. It's the rationale people use to justify bombing people now.

We believe in human rights. We have values that have transcend our bestial nature - something that makes us fundamentally different to those who lock people in cages and set them on fire.

Obviously this is and always has been a lie. But it's a little bit galling to hear people who've trotted it out for years now going "ah, well, tribalism's in our nature" the minute tens of thousands of desperate people start freezing to death on our doorsteps.

Of course, even if tribalism were in our nature, a quick glance at history suggests it's not always wise. Look at the collapse of the Western Roman Empire. It was caused, in the first instance, by a crisis of refugees displaced into the Roman Empire by the Huns. The Empire's refusal to provide food to the refugees or give them land on which to resettle led to a revolt. Two years after that point, the Emperor was killed and a Roman Army destroyed at Adrianople, a quarter of a century from that point, Rome was sacked by Visigoths (the people who'd sought refuge), and a century later the Western Roman Empire was no more.

I'm pretty sure that "never again" is in reference to genocide and racial segregation and the like, not as some catch all term for a perceived lack of compassion. The notion that a state is responsible for itself and it's own is nothing new, and not at odds with slogans like "never again" I don't think. We didn't see a rejection of tribalism after the holocaust, just a healthier redefining of it away from race and ethnic background and toward the more pragmatic identity of nationality instead. We do need some substantive thread running through us to maintain a harmonious society though, which is probably why our passive European brand of multiculturalism is looking more and more like a failure.

And the fall of the Western Roman Empire is much more a straightforward lesson about military strength than it is a convoluted one about welcoming refugees. The simple fact is that while strong a tribalist civilization might fall, a passive one almost certainly will. Just ask the Native Americans.

" western society can't cope" " our culture will be swamped" " infrastructure will crumble" these arguments aren't new. The same thing has been said about every migration to Britain from the Huguenots to the Polish. My house is still standing, I can still get red wine in the shop and as far as I can tell the football is going ahead tomorrow. Anti immigration politics are dominated by the frightened and the bigoted.

While pro-immigration politics is dominated largely by the oblivious and insulated self-righteous bourgeoisie (dancing like puppets for the neoliberals), with a grasp of history seemingly measured in months not centuries. The track record of mass immigration is a grim one, and almost universally works out poorly for native populations. The higher the numbers and the less culturally compatible the worse it is (the protestant and anti-Louis XIV Huguenots were actually largely welcomed in England though, by the way).

For example if you don't think that mass Polish immigration has had a devastating effect on many people's lives then you're utterly detached from the plight of the working class, especially tradesmen. It's no fun being laid off or having your wages slashed because someone from Eastern Europe has come over and will work for peanuts. The cultural argument is not an unfair one either, as there are already self-segregating communities in the UK that are unrecognisably British, with some third generation migrants even less integrated than their grandparents were, a problem that's only worsening. And the strain on infrastructure, particularly housing and schools is hardly imaginary either. You could say that's a failing of the state for not spending the money to keep up, but you'd also have to just about wipe out your precious migrant tax revenue to do it.

It's not that the pro-immigration control side of the argument is concerned about nothing, it's that the pro-mass immigration side sets the bar so low that as long as they can get their wine and their house stays standing they couldn't give a fuck about anyone else (unless they're some form of minority).
 

Aber gas

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 18, 2015
Messages
5,497
Reaction score
3,989
Points
113
Location
Abergavenny
Supports
Bristol rovers
I'm pretty sure that "never again" is in reference to genocide and racial segregation and the like, not as some catch all term for a perceived lack of compassion. The notion that a state is responsible for itself and it's own is nothing new, and not at odds with slogans like "never again" I don't think. We didn't see a rejection of tribalism after the holocaust, just a healthier redefining of it away from race and ethnic background and toward the more pragmatic identity of nationality instead. We do need some substantive thread running through us to maintain a harmonious society though, which is probably why our passive European brand of multiculturalism is looking more and more like a failure.

And the fall of the Western Roman Empire is much more a straightforward lesson about military strength than it is a convoluted one about welcoming refugees. The simple fact is that while strong a tribalist civilization might fall, a passive one almost certainly will. Just ask the Native Americans.



While pro-immigration politics is dominated largely by the oblivious and insulated self-righteous bourgeoisie (dancing like puppets for the neoliberals), with a grasp of history seemingly measured in months not centuries. The track record of mass immigration is a grim one, and almost universally works out poorly for native populations. The higher the numbers and the less culturally compatible the worse it is (the protestant and anti-Louis XIV Huguenots were actually largely welcomed in England though, by the way).

For example if you don't think that mass Polish immigration has had a devastating effect on many people's lives then you're utterly detached from the plight of the working class, especially tradesmen. It's no fun being laid off or having your wages slashed because someone from Eastern Europe has come over and will work for peanuts. The cultural argument is not an unfair one either, as there are already self-segregating communities in the UK that are unrecognisably British, with some third generation migrants even less integrated than their grandparents were, a problem that's only worsening. And the strain on infrastructure, particularly housing and schools is hardly imaginary either. You could say that's a failing of the state for not spending the money to keep up, but you'd also have to just about wipe out your precious migrant tax revenue to do it.

It's not that the pro-immigration control side of the argument is concerned about nothing, it's that the pro-mass immigration side sets the bar so low that as long as they can get their wine and their house stays standing they couldn't give a fuck about anyone else (unless they're some form of minority).
You assume a lot. I'm not from some comfortable, middle class background. I know exactly what it is to be poor son. So don't fucking patronise me. My experience of immigration and living in an environment of different cultures is mainly positive so don't claim to speak for the white British working class ( whatever that means) because you don't .
 

Ebeneezer Goode

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 17, 2015
Messages
3,657
Reaction score
1,541
Points
113
Supports
England
In the sense that the views of no demographics are homogeneous no, of course I don't, but I'd wager mine are far more representative than yours are. And not just the working class either. 77% of the population as a whole wants reduced or halted immigration, with even 60% of first and second generation immigrants agreeing too. It's one of the most popular political positions there is in the UK, all without any real semblance of ethnonationalist backing in this country, which is telling.
 

Ian_Wrexham

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 5, 2015
Messages
567
Reaction score
736
Points
93
Supports
Comrade Lineker's Revolutionary Junta
I'm pretty sure that "never again" is in reference to genocide and racial segregation and the like, not as some catch all term for a perceived lack of compassion. The notion that a state is responsible for itself and it's own is nothing new, and not at odds with slogans like "never again" I don't think. We didn't see a rejection of tribalism after the holocaust, just a healthier redefining of it away from race and ethnic background and toward the more pragmatic identity of nationality instead. We do need some substantive thread running through us to maintain a harmonious society though, which is probably why our passive European brand of multiculturalism is looking more and more like a failure.

Where is this "passive European multiculturalism" you speak of? The last fifty years of British history have pretty much been a constant struggle for people of colour to peacefully live in European society without harassment and violence, from the state or from racists.

And the fall of the Western Roman Empire is much more a straightforward lesson about military strength than it is a convoluted one about welcoming refugees. The simple fact is that while strong a tribalist civilization might fall, a passive one almost certainly will. Just ask the Native Americans.

I'm not sure you can compare white settler-colonialism in the Americas with migration from the global south to Western Europe. Genocide of indigenous Americans was a clear goal of the colonial project. This wasn't a problem of refugees trying to live somewhere there were already people living, but a sustained attempt to extirpate indigenous groups for political and economic gain of an imperial power. America has had large numbers of refugees/economic migrants over the years, most notably Irish, Eastern European and Jewish immigrants during the 19th and 20th century. By and large, in spite of the discrimination new migrants faced, American society has benefited from the influx.

While pro-immigration politics is dominated largely by the oblivious and insulated self-righteous bourgeoisie (dancing like puppets for the neoliberals), with a grasp of history seemingly measured in months not centuries. The track record of mass immigration is a grim one, and almost universally works out poorly for native populations. The higher the numbers and the less culturally compatible the worse it is (the protestant and anti-Louis XIV Huguenots were actually largely welcomed in England though, by the way).

For example if you don't think that mass Polish immigration has had a devastating effect on many people's lives then you're utterly detached from the plight of the working class, especially tradesmen. It's no fun being laid off or having your wages slashed because someone from Eastern Europe has come over and will work for peanuts.

The plight of tradesmen over the last five years owes far more to the financial crisis than to immigration. Like, the construction industry basically stopped - it wasn't that Polish workers were undercutting wages there - there was very little building taking place at all. There would have been mass layoffs however you'd filled the structural demand for those tradesmen up to the financial crisis (and even your UKIPs would have let in skilled Polish builders at a time where there was a national shortage of those skills).

The cultural argument is not an unfair one either, as there are already self-segregating communities in the UK that are unrecognisably British, with some third generation migrants even less integrated than their grandparents were, a problem that's only worsening. And the strain on infrastructure, particularly housing and schools is hardly imaginary either. You could say that's a failing of the state for not spending the money to keep up, but you'd also have to just about wipe out your precious migrant tax revenue to do it.

Reckon that if third generation migrants (or, as they're better known, British people) don't identify with your British values, maybe you ought to get some better British values.

It's not that the pro-immigration control side of the argument is concerned about nothing, it's that the pro-mass immigration side sets the bar so low that as long as they can get their wine and their house stays standing they couldn't give a fuck about anyone else (unless they're some form of minority).

Says the person who is content to let people die this winter in their thousands for want of food and shelter that this country could easily provide to them. Weird that opposing this is considered an extreme position.
 

Aber gas

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 18, 2015
Messages
5,497
Reaction score
3,989
Points
113
Location
Abergavenny
Supports
Bristol rovers
In the sense that the views of no demographics are homogeneous no, of course I don't, but I'd wager mine are far more representative than yours are. And not just the working class either. 77% of the population as a whole wants reduced or halted immigration, with even 60% of first and second generation immigrants agreeing too. It's one of the most popular political positions there is in the UK, all without any real semblance of ethnonationalist backing in this country, which is telling.
Well these are your " facts" and percentages. I disagree . When I've got builder friends of mine filling vans full of toys, blankets and food for stranded refugees I will continue to have optimism in my community. I feel sorry for you, all you have is your racist, pessimistic and negative world view.
 

Aber gas

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 18, 2015
Messages
5,497
Reaction score
3,989
Points
113
Location
Abergavenny
Supports
Bristol rovers
Nice to see people out kicking out the bigots. Obviously all middle class liberals with no concept of the real world. I'm in this, guess which one.
 

Ebeneezer Goode

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 17, 2015
Messages
3,657
Reaction score
1,541
Points
113
Supports
England
Ah, the symbiotic relationship between the far-right and far-left dregs. What an embarrassment.
 

Aber gas

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 18, 2015
Messages
5,497
Reaction score
3,989
Points
113
Location
Abergavenny
Supports
Bristol rovers
I'm going to have to admit it. I'm sorry.im a sixth form student with dodgy hair who can pretensionially cook
 

Ian_Wrexham

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 5, 2015
Messages
567
Reaction score
736
Points
93
Supports
Comrade Lineker's Revolutionary Junta
Ah, the symbiotic relationship between the far-right and far-left dregs. What an embarrassment.

Once again you're drawing moral equivalence between those who literally glorify Adolf Hitler with people who militantly oppose them. Get some better politics.
 
Last edited:

HertsWolf

Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Joined
Jan 19, 2015
Messages
3,557
Reaction score
2,132
Points
113
Location
Hampshire and Ethiopia
Supports
Wolves
In the sense that the views of no demographics are homogeneous no, of course I don't, but I'd wager mine are far more representative than yours are.

Your encyclopaedic factual knowledge leaves the rest of us in awe. You are rather relentless in your mission to educate us all and close down debate or different opinions with incontrovertible facts. I'm not really at all sure why the rest of us bother when really all we need to do is have an 'Ask the Oracle' section when we can pose questions and complex subjects to you for the definitive answer.
 

HertsWolf

Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Joined
Jan 19, 2015
Messages
3,557
Reaction score
2,132
Points
113
Location
Hampshire and Ethiopia
Supports
Wolves
all without any real semblance of ethnonationalist backing in this country, which is telling.

Yes. If you forget about the Conservative Party, UKIP, the OUP, the DUP, the Mail, the Telegraph, the Express, the Sun, the Times, Sky TV, Global, many local media sources, multiple think-tanks.

Do you ever actually stop to think about what you are actually writing or does it all just spew out more or less uncontrollably?

Have you considered taking Imodium?
 

Aber gas

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 18, 2015
Messages
5,497
Reaction score
3,989
Points
113
Location
Abergavenny
Supports
Bristol rovers
I note that the local riot police appear to cover up their identification numbers on their uniforms. Bit naughty that. Or were they the military wing of the protesters?
It's still standard for the spg or whatever they call themselves these days especially the armoured ones.
 

Ebeneezer Goode

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 17, 2015
Messages
3,657
Reaction score
1,541
Points
113
Supports
England
Your encyclopaedic factual knowledge leaves the rest of us in awe. You are rather relentless in your mission to educate us all and close down debate or different opinions with incontrovertible facts. I'm not really at all sure why the rest of us bother when really all we need to do is have an 'Ask the Oracle' section when we can pose questions and complex subjects to you for the definitive answer.

Yes, because "I'd wager" is how you preface a comment meant as a statement of fact.

:ffs:

Yes. If you forget about the Conservative Party, UKIP, the OUP, the DUP, the Mail, the Telegraph, the Express, the Sun, the Times, Sky TV, Global, many local media sources, multiple think-tanks.

Do you ever actually stop to think about what you are actually writing or does it all just spew out more or less uncontrollably??

Other than the OUP and the DUP, the suggestion that any of those groups are ethnonationalist is absolutely laughable, do you even know what the term means? I can only assume that "do you ever stop to think" ramble was some form of projection.
 

Ebeneezer Goode

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 17, 2015
Messages
3,657
Reaction score
1,541
Points
113
Supports
England
Where is this "passive European multiculturalism" you speak of? The last fifty years of British history have pretty much been a constant struggle for people of colour to peacefully live in European society without harassment and violence, from the state or from racists.

We've been conditioned for the last couple of decades to believe that Britishness is the state of having the requisite passport, and at most perhaps the vaguest of traits like 'tolerance' and 'niceness'. We've been taught that British culture isn't really a thing, that we're not really an ethnic group, and to try and safeguard or acknowledge either is tantamount to BNP-thinking. It's easily swallowed when it's your own culture, because it's something that's so difficult to articulate and so unfashionable to value, but when you see the same thing happening in Sweden for example, a country you would never imagine to suggest had no culture, and others especially in Northern Europe, you start to get a sense of what's going on. This is the price of passive multiculturalism, because there's no way you can both celebrate and accept your own cultural and national identity, while paradoxically accepting those with an identity at odds with it as if they were one in the same. It's not so much that immigrants are rejecting British values, it's that they've scarcely been exposed to them or asked to embrace them. We do not assert our culture or values, we leave people to their self-segregating communities because we know that cries of racism and bigotry from the simpletons will await us if we don't.

I'm not sure you can compare white settler-colonialism in the Americas with migration from the global south to Western Europe. Genocide of indigenous Americans was a clear goal of the colonial project. This wasn't a problem of refugees trying to live somewhere there were already people living, but a sustained attempt to extirpate indigenous groups for political and economic gain of an imperial power. America has had large numbers of refugees/economic migrants over the years, most notably Irish, Eastern European and Jewish immigrants during the 19th and 20th century. By and large, in spite of the discrimination new migrants faced, American society has benefited from the influx.

The genocide of the Native Americans happened in large part because they offered such little resistance, especially in the beginning. The same colonial powers that almost wiped them out encountered natives all over the globe, many with greater natural resources, but left them as a people relatively enact. Why? Because they'd have put up more of a fight. With the Native Americans, sadly, it was relatively easy. Columbus himself remarked in his writings about how 'full of love' they were and how utterly unfamiliar they were with warfare. It was their downfall, and it's a lesson repeated throughout history. It's the same reason that none of the forms of Christianity that flourished actually reflected Jesus' liberal hippyness. They wouldn't have lasted ten minutes.

This isn't really an issue with which you can really compare the USA to European nations either. America isn't founded on the representation of a native people, it's founded on the destruction of one. In this sense "American society" and migrant influxes are one in the same. Besides, the USA asserts it's values incredibly strongly (and perhaps as a consequence doesn't suffer radical Islam like we do), while Northern Europe has been largely meek and passive of late in it's approach to cultures that are at odds with their own. It's isn't working though, and the far(ish) right seems to be getting more and more popular as a result.

The plight of tradesmen over the last five years owes far more to the financial crisis than to immigration. Like, the construction industry basically stopped - it wasn't that Polish workers were undercutting wages there - there was very little building taking place at all. There would have been mass layoffs however you'd filled the structural demand for those tradesmen up to the financial crisis (and even your UKIPs would have let in skilled Polish builders at a time where there was a national shortage of those skills).

The argument for borders is not an argument against any and all immigration, it's an argument for controlled migration policy crafted to suit the needs of the nation and it's people. You can't just dismiss Polish undercutting (which I've seen first hand) as an issue just because the banking collapse was a larger one. It's a problem you'd hear about all the time, and I trust the tradesmen to know the difference between undercutting and a simple lack of work.

Says the person who is content to let people die this winter in their thousands for want of food and shelter that this country could easily provide to them. Weird that opposing this is considered an extreme position.

We should help somewhat were we can afford to, but not before British homelessness has been eradicated first, and not to any random economic migrant who has volunteered themselves into their current situation either.

Well these are your " facts" and percentages. I disagree . When I've got builder friends of mine filling vans full of toys, blankets and food for stranded refugees I will continue to have optimism in my community. I feel sorry for you, all you have is your racist, pessimistic and negative world view.

Those percentages are from the British Social Attitudes Survey, and were pretty widely reported on. They're not really a matter of opinion, though even if they were I'm not sure what builders supporting refugees has to do with tradesmen getting undercut by Polish economic migrants. Thank you for proving my point about simpletons crying racist though.

Once again you're drawing moral equivalence between those who literally glorify Adolf Hitler with people who militantly oppose them.

I wasn't offering a moral commentary at all, merely observing two sets of self-defeating idiots shouting at each other in the street. I would suggest however that violent opposition to any form of free expression is worse than glorifying Hitler, though I'm sure the National Front are guilty of the former too.
 

HertsWolf

Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Joined
Jan 19, 2015
Messages
3,557
Reaction score
2,132
Points
113
Location
Hampshire and Ethiopia
Supports
Wolves
Yes, because "I'd wager" is how you preface a comment meant as a statement of fact.

:ffs:
Ah! The old face palm emoji to indicate moral and intellectual superiority. "I'd wager my facts are more representative of your facts" is a statement of sheer arrogance. Especially as you've been found out numerous times before with your spurious facts. Each time you blather your way around it and change the subject.

Shall I chuck in the ultimate arrogance of the face palm emoji? Nah.

Other than the OUP and the DUP, the suggestion that any of those groups are ethnonationalist is absolutely laughable, do you even know what the term means? I can only assume that "do you ever stop to think" ramble was some form of projection.
Many would suggest that every single one of those has an ethnonationalist agenda, albeit to differing degrees.

What I truly dislike about you, Ebeneezer Gradgrind, is your sneering attitude towards those who disagree with you or refuse to allow your interpretation of the world to be stamped as authoritative. You're an intellectual bully who simply tries to win arguments by ridiculing others. However, in this forum there's a good selection of people, of different political backgrounds across the spectrum, who are prepared to stand up to you. I don't think I ever see as much domineering, contemptuous responses to the opinions of others as you display on a daily basis.

And yes, I do know exactly what ethnonationalism is.

And laughable? Yes, the concept of you accusing others of rambling is the point at which irony became clear even to Cardsfan.
 

sl1k

the one
Joined
Jan 18, 2015
Messages
1,182
Reaction score
648
Points
113
Location
.
Supports
.
Especially as you've been found out numerous times before with your spurious facts. Each time you blather your way around it and change the subject.

EG is a master of the whataboutery and strawman to death tactics. It's a battle of attrition with him ;)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Red

HertsWolf

Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Joined
Jan 19, 2015
Messages
3,557
Reaction score
2,132
Points
113
Location
Hampshire and Ethiopia
Supports
Wolves
EG is a master of the whataboutery and strawman to death tactics. It's a battle of attrition with him ;)

It's like dealing with a brighter version of SERNWA. Most people use verbs like feel, sense, believe, think but EG presents everything from his argument as just factually perfect, and he has the absolute definitive, authoritative, mind-numbingly correct answer to everything and presents it in a manner that suggests if you disagree you are stupid, uneducated or ripe for ridicule. Yesterday he rather authoritatively and dismissively answered a question that I hadn't even asked.
 

spireite

We used to make shit
Joined
Jan 17, 2015
Messages
4,133
Reaction score
1,667
Points
113
Supports
Chesterfield
It's like dealing with a brighter version of SERNWA. Most people use verbs like feel, sense, believe, think but EG presents everything from his argument as just factually perfect, and he has the absolute definitive, authoritative, mind-numbingly correct answer to everything and presents it in a manner that suggests if you disagree you are stupid, uneducated or ripe for ridicule. Yesterday he rather authoritatively and dismissively answered a question that I hadn't even asked.
To be fair, he faces a lot of provocation and abuse but just lets it run off. That reflects badly on those arguing with him and presents him in a better light, whether he was right or not. Just above Aber gas essentially callled him bigoted, EG responded and Aber gas said 'You assume a lot, don't fucking patronize me'. So it's OK for Aber to be nasty and use ad-hominem arguments, but not the other way around? Yet EG didn't respond. Right in what he says or not, I think his ability to calmly respond to people tearing into him is admirable. I certainly can't do it :lol:
 

HertsWolf

Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Joined
Jan 19, 2015
Messages
3,557
Reaction score
2,132
Points
113
Location
Hampshire and Ethiopia
Supports
Wolves
To be fair, he faces a lot of provocation and abuse but just lets it run off. That reflects badly on those arguing with him and presents him in a better light, whether he was right or not. Just above Aber gas essentially callled him bigoted, EG responded and Aber gas said 'You assume a lot, don't fucking patronize me'. So it's OK for Aber to be nasty and use ad-hominem arguments, but not the other way around? Yet EG didn't respond. Right in what he says or not, I think his ability to calmly respond to people tearing into him is admirable. I certainly can't do it :lol:

That's a fair point. But I've seen enough of it directly from EG over the year. So admirable? Nah. I'll pass on that one.
 

Aber gas

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 18, 2015
Messages
5,497
Reaction score
3,989
Points
113
Location
Abergavenny
Supports
Bristol rovers
To be fair, he faces a lot of provocation and abuse but just lets it run off. That reflects badly on those arguing with him and presents him in a better light, whether he was right or not. Just above Aber gas essentially callled him bigoted, EG responded and Aber gas said 'You assume a lot, don't fucking patronize me'. So it's OK for Aber to be nasty and use ad-hominem arguments, but not the other way around? Yet EG didn't respond. Right in what he says or not, I think his ability to calmly respond to people tearing into him is admirable. I certainly can't do it :lol:
Hang on a minute mate, I've put up with a lot of condescending and patronising put downs from him. Not to mention him calling me an idiot and a simpleton when I'm trying to converse with other people on the forum. I hav'nt got the vocabulary and sometimes struggle to get my point across but that doesn't make me a nastier or more provocative person.
 

spireite

We used to make shit
Joined
Jan 17, 2015
Messages
4,133
Reaction score
1,667
Points
113
Supports
Chesterfield
Hang on a minute mate, I've put up with a lot of condescending and patronising put downs from him. Not to mention him calling me an idiot and a simpleton when I'm trying to converse with other people on the forum. I hav'nt got the vocabulary and sometimes struggle to get my point across but that doesn't make me a nastier or more provocative person.
Oh no I wouldn't call you a nasty or provocative person, I don't know you, I'm sure you're a good person, but that's just how those posts came across and I was just trying to illustrate how EG doesn't lose his cool. You're certainly not the only one who seems to get wound up by EG's posts
 

sl1k

the one
Joined
Jan 18, 2015
Messages
1,182
Reaction score
648
Points
113
Location
.
Supports
.
To be fair, he faces a lot of provocation and abuse but just lets it run off.

:fl:

Let's not paint him to be a victim now, he's just very good at dressing up ad hominems and sliding them into his very well constructed arguments.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Red

Forum statistics

Threads
16,573
Messages
1,227,158
Members
8,512
Latest member
you dont know

SITE SPONSORS

W88 W88 trang chu KUBET Thailand
Fun88 12Bet Get top UK casino bonuses for British players in casinos not on GamStop
The best ₤1 minimum deposit casinos UK not on GamStop Find the best new no deposit casino get bonus and play legendary slots Best UK online casinos list 2022
No-Verification.Casino Casinos that accept PayPal Top online casinos
sure.bet miglioriadm.net: siti scommesse non aams
Need help with your academic papers? Customwritings offers high-quality professionals to write essays that deserve an A!
Top