The Dirty Independence Question

[Comfy Bean]

13 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

You said 'brit nats'.

Why did you say only brit nats would try to avoid higher taxes?

 

I did, and I also said rich folks. You said rich scots.

 

I didn`t.

 

This is pathetic and ridiculous. Do you think I am a racist ? Yes or No ?

Edited April 28, 2016 by comfortablynumb1910
bold added with some underlining

[eFestivals]

11 minutes ago, comfortablynumb1910 said:

I did, and I also said rich folks. You said rich scots.

 

I didn`t.

 

This is pathetic and ridiculous. Do you think I am a racist ? Yes or No ?

Your words suggest that you were being.

Tell me what you meant with your words. Answer those two questions I've asked of you.

Your continual avoidance in doing so only further suggests that you know that you were being racist.

 

Edited April 28, 2016 by eFestivals

[Comfy Bean]

2 hours ago, eFestivals said:

Your words suggest that you were being.

Tell me what you meant with your words. Answer those two questions I've asked of you.

Your continual avoidance in doing so only further suggests that you know that you were being racist.

 

Would you mind clarifying your question(s) and outlining the reasons for calling me a racist. Please be specific.

I`ve have made around 10 posts since your initial allegation which you have repeated several times now. These were me attempting to clear this up and answer you but clearly we are not getting anywhere. When your questions include things I didn`t say then all I can really do is quote exactly what we both said and ask you to apologise for your confusion or at the very least withdraw your racist claims. Like an idiot, I still hope you will eventually do one of those two things 

Oh and I know that I was NOT being racist. I think we both know that.

[LJS]

[LJS]

 

 

[LJS]

The vile Nat codewords in full:

London = England

Westminster = England

Tory = English

Labour = English

Out = England

Britain = England

[eFestivals]

19 hours ago, comfortablynumb1910 said:

Would you mind clarifying your question(s) and outlining the reasons for calling me a racist. Please be specific.

I`ve have made around 10 posts since your initial allegation which you have repeated several times now. These were me attempting to clear this up and answer you but clearly we are not getting anywhere. When your questions include things I didn`t say then all I can really do is quote exactly what we both said and ask you to apologise for your confusion or at the very least withdraw your racist claims. Like an idiot, I still hope you will eventually do one of those two things 

Oh and I know that I was NOT being racist. I think we both know that.

trying to hide it behind the whitewash of stupid questions?

The two questions are above.

And if you need to ask me how you might have been racist, you're unable to recognise racism to be able to say you've not been racist.

 

[eFestivals]

11 hours ago, LJS said:

wayhey .;... if the price rises by another 200%, you're in business..

Oh, except you still wouldn't be, because the oil price isn't the oil revenues, and while fatman used reasonable assumptions for the oil price, he didn't about the oil revenues.

He made those up, he LIED!

And I see the man who only yesterday claimed there was no selfishness in the want for indy is today shouting "its ooor oil".

But ... but ... but ... I thought the line was "oil is just a bonus" anyway? Are you suggesting that Scotland is dependent on oil, and not the vibrant and diverse financially-safe nation you spent months telling me it was?

 

Edited April 29, 2016 by eFestivals

[eFestivals]

10 hours ago, LJS said:

The vile Nat codewords in full:

London = England

Westminster = England

Tory = English

Labour = English

Out = England

Britain = England

Dog whistles, that you respond to.

But comfy didn't dog whistle. he was straightforwards racist.

Only Non-Scots would avoid higher Scottish taxes.

And none of the 50%-ish of people in Scotland who are voting for a tax freeze are doing that. of course.

Edited April 29, 2016 by eFestivals

[Comfy Bean]

1 hour ago, eFestivals said:

trying to hide it behind the whitewash of stupid questions?

The two questions are above.

And if you need to ask me how you might have been racist, you're unable to recognise racism to be able to say you've not been racist.

 

In fairness I was seeking to clarify your questions and asking you to be specific as I thought I had answered them. I have quoted in full ( nice of you to clarify if I had edited any of my words  - I hadn`t ) what you said and what I said and when. We clarified that you struggle with the term " originally ".

By quoting lots of your posts and a couple of mine we established that you used the terms rich scots and unionists in our exchange on who could, in theory, cross a border to avoid higher taxes. I used what I claimed were more encompassing terms - rich folks and brit nats. You tried to imply that I said english and of course you then added hated english and you also invented my use of the word " only ". I have highlighted that you were the only one who mentioned one nationality as a group who could in your words flea.

You are not daft enough to think that only english people can be unionists, rich or brit nats. Neither am I, despite your claims   I also used the caveat in one of the posts that these folks were of course perfectly entitled to live ( although I spelt it as life )  wherever they wish and added " no hard feelings etc ".

It is crystal clear from my post where I used the term brit nat that I was responding directly to your opinion that rich scots might flea. You then invented the fact that I said / meant english and then built your racism argument from there by introducing terms like true scot ( which I questioned at the time ), quisling and traitor. I find these words offensive but you were quick to introduce them in some game plan that led to you having a feeling of "success" 

You have recently tried to change the tone of our discussion to make it about lies and hatred. In your words, you now conclude that it must all be about hatred of the English  You have accused me of hating english people several times recently. I know for a fact that you know this is nonsense so I question why you deliberately and continuously employ these tactics.

 You have rightly criticised the idiots on both sides who deploy vile tactics of introducing hatred and bigotry into the independence debate. I remember speaking before on here about being surrounded by it where I live and how these people are a stain on our society.

I have given up on an apology, I know what I am and I am very comfortable when I say that I am not a racist. 

 

[Comfy Bean]

2 hours ago, eFestivals said:

wayhey .;... if the price rises by another 200%, you're in business..

Oh, except you still wouldn't be, because the oil price isn't the oil revenues, and while fatman used reasonable assumptions for the oil price, he didn't about the oil revenues.

He made those up, he LIED!

And I see the man who only yesterday claimed there was no selfishness in the want for indy is today shouting "its ooor oil".

But ... but ... but ... I thought the line was "oil is just a bonus" anyway? Are you suggesting that Scotland is dependent on oil, and not the vibrant and diverse financially-safe nation you spent months telling me it was?

 

FFS 

[eFestivals]

Just now, comfortablynumb1910 said:

By quoting lots of your posts and a couple of mine we established that you used the terms rich scots and unionists in our exchange on who could, in theory, cross a border to avoid higher taxes

Anyone could cross the border to avoid taxes.

You *ONLY* said that 'brit nats' would do.

What can't you understand about what you've said?

You were clearly implying that it would only be "non Scots" who would avoid those higher taxes.

FFS.

 

[Comfy Bean]

Just now, eFestivals said:

Anyone could cross the border to avoid taxes.* said

You said that *ONLY* 'brit nats' would do.

What can't you understand about what you've said?

You were clearly implying that it would only be "non Scots" who would avoid those higher taxes.

FFS.

 

No I didn`t. I have already quoted our exchange in full.

 

No I wasn`t. I have already quoted our exchange in full.

 

You said " rich scots " I`ve highlighted that already. You are accusing me of doing what only you did. It`s all there in front of you. As I said the other day, I do NOT think that you were being racist when YOU claimed rich Scots could flea. Why did you say " scots " ?

 I am clearly saying that it would be rich folk the vast majority would obviously be Scots if, in this imaginery scenario, we are talking about folk leaving Scotland ffs.

Of course, you already know this.

[eFestivals]

45 minutes ago, comfortablynumb1910 said:

No I didn`t. I have already quoted our exchange in full.

Yes you did.

You didn't say anyone else would run away from those higher taxes, you only said that 'brit nats' would do.

FFS.

Why did you choose to only say 'brit nats' - where the inference was very clearly 'non Scots'?

It can't be justified. There is absolutely no relationship between a constitutional view and an opinion towards taxes.

 

[eFestivals]

48 minutes ago, comfortablynumb1910 said:

You said " rich scots " I`ve highlighted that already. You are accusing me of doing what only you did.

No.

You said 'brit nats'.

I did not.

Why do you keep lying about what you posted?

 

[LJS]

A song for Neil

 

[eFestivals]

1 hour ago, comfortablynumb1910 said:

FFS 

because he's not overweight?

I see you decided to accept that he's a liar and only object to his physical description..

That's a bit of progress, I guess.

[Comfy Bean]

43 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

Yes you did.

You didn't say anyone else would run away from those higher taxes, you only said that 'brit nats' would do.

FFS.

Why did you choose to only say 'brit nats' - where the inference was very clearly 'non Scots'?

It can't be justified. There is absolutely no relationship between a constitutional view and an opinion towards taxes.

 

This will be my last post on this subject. I accept that you will be able to bask on what you see as another " success " for your " style " of posting. I hope it makes you feel warm inside. I have already stated that I am comfortable with my position and am happy to let exactly what was posted by both of us speak for itself going forward. It is crystal clear for all to see that I was in no way being racist and neither were you 

It is also crystal clear that you will not withdraw your allegations of racism never mind apologise.

 By making up words that I didn`t say ( only and english ) and introducing vile and offensive terms that I didn`t say ( quisling and traitor ) you have stooped to new depths to score what you ( and I would suggest only you ) will see as a victory. 

I did not say only brit nats. I did originally describe this imaginery scenario as involving rich folks.

You said rich scots. You are now saying I " inferred "  non scots. Perhaps even read this line back....Slowly 

As I have said already, the vast majority of people in this hypothetical and now tedious exchange WOULD be Scots as we are talking about folks who live in SCOTLAND but of course you knew that already. 

When referring to Alex Salmond earlier as " Fatman " you again demonstrated a lack of class that does you no favours. It`s childish insults. Same as it ever was 

 

[LJS]

So, 2 things are abundantly clear...

 

1. Comfy ain't racist.

 

2. Neil lacks the common decency (or perhaps courage?) to admit he is wrong. & apologise. He Prefers to continue to lie.

[eFestivals]

1 hour ago, comfortablynumb1910 said:

This will be my last post on this subject. I accept that you will be able to bask on what you see as another " success " for your " style " of posting. I hope it makes you feel warm inside. I have already stated that I am comfortable with my position and am happy to let exactly what was posted by both of us speak for itself going forward. It is crystal clear for all to see that I was in no way being racist and neither were you 

It is also crystal clear that you will not withdraw your allegations of racism never mind apologise.

 By making up words that I didn`t say ( only and english ) and introducing vile and offensive terms that I didn`t say ( quisling and traitor ) you have stooped to new depths to score what you ( and I would suggest only you ) will see as a victory. 

I did not say only brit nats. I did originally describe this imaginery scenario as involving rich folks.

You said rich scots. You are now saying I " inferred "  non scots. Perhaps even read this line back....Slowly 

As I have said already, the vast majority of people in this hypothetical and now tedious exchange WOULD be Scots as we are talking about folks who live in SCOTLAND but of course you knew that already. 

When referring to Alex Salmond earlier as " Fatman " you again demonstrated a lack of class that does you no favours. It`s childish insults. Same as it ever was 

 

The "only" was there by you *only* mentioning 'brit nats' as the ones to avoid taxes..

And if you meant "rich Scots", why didn't you say rich Scots? You *clearly* meant something different to rich Scots, that there was a label-able subset of them that would avoid taxes.

Yet the subset you chose to mention had nothing to do with an attitude towards raxes, but instead was an attitude towards constitutional set-up.

One that you labelled "British" and not "Scottish" - you know, their nationality (a pejorative use in UK hatred laws) - and yet you were talking about taxes in Scotland and not in 'Britain', so nothing about Britain applied.

If you're really too stupid to understand what you did and why you did it you're far too stupid to deserve a vote.

[LJS]

2 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

The "only" was there by you *only* mentioning 'brit nats' as the ones to avoid taxes..

And if you meant "rich Scots", why didn't you say rich Scots? You *clearly* meant something different to rich Scots, that there was a label-able subset of them that would avoid taxes.

Yet the subset you chose to mention had nothing to do with an attitude towards raxes, but instead was an attitude towards constitutional set-up.

One that you labelled "British" and not "Scottish" - you know, their nationality (a pejorative use in UK hatred laws) - and yet you were talking about taxes in Scotland and not in 'Britain', so nothing about Britain applied.

If you're really too stupid to understand what you did and why you did it you're far too stupid to deserve a vote.

Incredible,

 

Literally.

[eFestivals]

14 minutes ago, LJS said:

So, 2 things are abundantly clear...

 

1. Comfy ain't racist.

 

2. Neil lacks the common decency (or perhaps courage?) to admit he is wrong. & apologise. He Prefers to continue to lie.

 

Comfy isn't racist, but neither of you can tell me what comfy meant by saying that only 'brit nats' were avoiders of Scottish taxes.

How very odd.

He very clearly meant it in a pejorative way.

It refers to nationality.

I suggest you spend a few minutes reading up on the UK's hatred laws.

And then be stupid enough to tell me again that you can't see what comfy was doing and why. :rolleyes:

[eFestivals]

1 minute ago, LJS said:

Incredible,

 

Literally.

Yes, he literally ONLY mentioned 'brit nats' as tax avoiders.

What literacy problems do you suffer from?

[eFestivals]

3 hours ago, eFestivals said:

Why did you choose to only say 'brit nats' - where the inference was very clearly 'non Scots'?

 

[LJS]

inference

ˈɪnf(ə)r(ə)ns/

noun

a conclusion reached on the basis of evidence and reasoning.

 

Or in the Neil's English Dictionary (NED)

 

Noun:

A conclusion based on conjecture & prejudice.