The EU: In, out, shake it all about.... (352 Viewers)

[martcov]

So I have to prove that something that didn't happen didn't?

If what you are saying is true you would have found lots if evidence. You would have been ramming it down my throat. But you said the Nazis stated that they would have taken Churchill to court on the charge of being a war criminal.

And as I keep reminding you it was Hitler in charge of everything. If even one of his best Generals went against him he would be dead.

Admit you have made a mistake and we can move on. But continue with your lies and I won't drop it. You know what I am like when you come out with lies and misinformation. Just like with the Selmayr debacle where you tried to make out that because the EU commission said nothing was wrong it meant no rules and regulations were broke. And as you know there is much more you have come out with.

There have been several quotes that the Nazis saw Churchill as a war criminal. He was in the black book. Those in the book were the priorities for capture or elimination. Yes, I cannot find a direct quote as not every page of every book on the subject is easily googled, but to deny that the Nazis, or Hitler, didn’t count him as a war criminal in view of what Rosenberg and Goebbels said and the entry in the Black Book which Hitler would have known about, is just being obtuse.

At the very least, there is a distinct possibility that I am right and there is no evidence to the contrary that I am liar.

As for the Selmayr thing I quoted from the report saying that the law was stretched, possibly even broken. The final report changed that. So, I was telling the truth by quoting the report, linking the rules and linking the reply to the report.

The final report refuted the reply to the report and came to the conclusion that the law had been broken. That doesn’t mean I lied, it means you were saying what the final verdict was and ignoring the other side‘s version, before the final verdict was given. Just to fit your views. I was not committing myself until it was over.

 

---

[martcov]

And so were those Brits who condemned the area bombing of Germany such as Vera Brittain.

And Noel Coward. There were various reasons for people being in the black book, but not many of them were blamed for the bombing or wanting the war by leading Nazis. Churchill was though.

 

[martcov]

I said that if Germany won the war the Jews would have all been murdered and we would either have been speaking German or been murdered ourselves.

Mart said maybe......But

He didn't want what most probably would have happened. He had a point to get across.

I didn’t have a point to get across, I didn’t even bring the subject up.

I said maybe because I don’t know if all Jews would have been killed after a German victory and it wasn’t what the questioner asked.

 

[skybluetony176]

And now back to the truth.

It is frustrating how someone can lie then have people like yourself back him up when it is off topic. And all because he is pro EU whatever like yourself. And yourself? UKIP voter who made racist comments. And once you saw that what you voted for was not what was best for you there was a sudden change of mind. You went from one end of the scale straight to the opposite end of the scale.

Yeah good one. I’ve told you a gazillion times why I voted UKIP on one occasion and it was nothing like you’ve just fabricated. You asked for proof that Churchill would have been arrested and trialed, I give you the evidence and rather than put your hands up and say OK you start making personal things up. Good work for a neutral.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

Me comprehensive problems? No.

I am picking you up on a lie/misinformation as usual. I said how wrong all killing of civilians was and still is. I said Dresden was wrong. Then out came the uneducated with what happened at Dresden. BSB said it was all us as America only did strategic bombing. But they killed countless thousands who were trying to escape.

As you well know German law doesn't allow people to try and change history. I admire them for this. I am of the same viewpoint. What happened all them years ago shouldn't be held against people of the countries involved. But we need to not change history so lessons can be learned.

Area bombing was most certainly a British policy and was masterminded by Bomber Harris then rubber stamped by Churchill. As I said originally, whether historians view the policy as criminal is disputed, but can you really imagine the Nazis letting them off with it?

That’s what you can’t get into your head. You now want ever more specific quotes about putting him on trial and if those are provided you’ll want details of who the judge would be. Even in 1940 he was listed in the Black Book and later there are prominent Nazis calling him a criminal. There really isn’t any doubt

 

[skybluetony176]

And so were those Brits who condemned the area bombing of Germany such as Vera Brittain.

Which is exactly the point. If people who opposed area bombing are in The Black Book the notion that people who promoted and ordered area bombing would have gotten of Scott free is nonsense. It’s a ridiculous standpoint from morons who would argue it’s Friday if Mart said it’s Thursday. There is no way Churchill wouldn’t have been tried for war crimes by the Nazi’s and you’ve just highlighted why. The Black Book is infamous. It’s hardly a secret, it’s even appeared in popular culture numerous times since the war. I can’t believe anyone arguing with Mart hasn’t heard of it (maybe the ironically named astute because he thinks horses love horse racing) yet they’ve still taken a juxtaposition for the sake of arguing. That’s a measure of how pathetic they are.

 

[martcov]

So I have to prove that something that didn't happen didn't?

If what you are saying is true you would have found lots if evidence. You would have been ramming it down my throat. But you said the Nazis stated that they would have taken Churchill to court on the charge of being a war criminal.

And as I keep reminding you it was Hitler in charge of everything. If even one of his best Generals went against him he would be dead.

Admit you have made a mistake and we can move on. But continue with your lies and I won't drop it. You know what I am like when you come out with lies and misinformation. Just like with the Selmayr debacle where you tried to make out that because the EU commission said nothing was wrong it meant no rules and regulations were broke. And as you know there is much more you have come out with.

You are asking me to prove that Churchill would have been tried if the war had been won by Germany. Then you moan that you have to prove something that didn’t happen. Germany didn’t win the war, but the Nazis classed Churchill as a a war criminal. Then you say, but Hitler was in charge and try to make out that when other top Nazis say that Churchill was a war criminal, it doesn’t count because Hitler didn’t say it ( he did but I cannot find a link ). The original question was whether the Germans would have tried Churchill, you have moved it to Hitler personally charging and trying Churchill. Hitler had a cabinet. If he was the only person running Germany, why did we bother having Nürnberg? The excuse ‚I was only following Hitler’s orders‘ would be enough for you.

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

Oh my goodness

 

[martcov]

You deleted the posts. Then you even lied about that.

But how about when I quoted your posts? You never said anything about it then. If I had changed what you had said you would have mentioned it at the time.

The EU: In, out, shake it all about....

On the third post down on this link you will see where I have quoted you. You ignored this each time. It is one of your posts that you have deleted then said you never made. I haven't called you a liar because of these posts. I have called you a liar because of the lies you have come out with for covering the misinformation you have come out with since to cover it up.

I have never deleted a post. Liar.

I have never lied about Selmayr. Liar.

I haven’t come out with misinformation. Liar.

You are a complete liar.

 

[martcov]

Explain why I am right wing.

I look at the evidence on both sides. I mentioned why people voted remain. Not a word from you. I mentioned why people voted leave. This made me anti EU and anti FOM. I mentioned about our population going up. The good you ignored. The bad made me anti EU and anti FOM. I mentioned about the EU. The good was ignored. The bad made me anti EU and anti FOM. I mentioned the lies from leave before the referendum. You ignored this. I mentioned the lies from remain. This made me anti EU and anti FOM.

I could go on all day.

Isn't it strange how I have called just about everything right though including that we won't be leaving the EU next month or without a deal when everyone was saying the opposite.

As you know I am looking at moving my family to France. Yet you come out with your crap about me on being anti FOM. Your problem is that you are not a realist. You only want to consider what you want. Everyone else is wrong or uneducated.

Yet again I will say it clearly. As a whole I think we are better off staying in the EU. But that doesn't mean that everyone is better off staying in the EU. If we had a government that built enough homes and kept up with the infrastructure it would be a different matter. But because of the cuts we don't even repair potholes in roads. The needy are not looked after like they used to be. Tax is kept low as it is a vote winner. Less income less investment. Public sector workers have been without pay rises for years. Now they have got well under inflation even though it is low.

Maybe if you lived in the UK you would have a better idea what is going on.

You are not neutral and not honest. You are a liar and a twister, twisting which you use to claim you are always right, which is another lie in itself.

 

[shmmeee]

Sooooo...Brexit huh?

 

[martcov]

So I have to prove that something that didn't happen didn't?

If what you are saying is true you would have found lots if evidence. You would have been ramming it down my throat. But you said the Nazis stated that they would have taken Churchill to court on the charge of being a war criminal.

And as I keep reminding you it was Hitler in charge of everything. If even one of his best Generals went against him he would be dead.

Admit you have made a mistake and we can move on. But continue with your lies and I won't drop it. You know what I am like when you come out with lies and misinformation. Just like with the Selmayr debacle where you tried to make out that because the EU commission said nothing was wrong it meant no rules and regulations were broke. And as you know there is much more you have come out with.

Another lie. I did quote the the original EC argumentation as balance against your rabid accusations, something you didn’t do Mr Neutral, but the main quote saying „possibly even“ that I quoted came from the initial ombudsman’s report. It was the law quote not the regulations that was quoted by me. You are twisting yet again to claim that I am a liar.

 

[Deleted member 5849]

Sooooo...Brexit huh?

This is all a cunning plan so we welcome some Brexit chat.

 

[Astute]

There have been several quotes that the Nazis saw Churchill as a war criminal. He was in the black book. Those in the book were the priorities for capture or elimination. Yes, I cannot find a direct quote as not every page of every book on the subject is easily googled, but to deny that the Nazis, or Hitler, didn’t count him as a war criminal in view of what Rosenberg and Goebbels said and the entry in the Black Book which Hitler would have known about, is just being obtuse.

At the very least, there is a distinct possibility that I am right and there is no evidence to the contrary that I am a liar.

So you might not be a liar as a Nazi somewhere might have said what you said they did?

I rest my case.

 

[Deleted member 5849]

FFS!

 

[Deleted member 5849]

Who wants the last word then? Go on, I'll have it.

 

[Astute]

Yeah good one. I’ve told you a gazillion times why I voted UKIP on one occasion and it was nothing like you’ve just fabricated. You asked for proof that Churchill would have been arrested and trialed, I give you the evidence and rather than put your hands up and say OK you start making personal things up. Good work for a neutral.

Yes you gave an excuse on why you voted UKIP. What was your excuse for the racist remarks?

 

[Deleted member 5849]

Oh no I won't.

 

[Deleted member 5849]

Oh yes I will.

 

[Deleted member 5849]

I went for a walk yesterday, lovely it was. Sun was out, birds were singing, grass was green and pure. Just at the end of the walk I stopped, and had a frankfurter. Then I had another walk. This one too was sunny, warm, but not too warm. At the end of this walk I stopped and got me a chinese. It's not proper chinese though. Proper chinese is pretty different and way beyond my taste. The wierd eel type dish I had once was particularly strange. Mind you, not as strange as the time I went to Germany and ordered three portions of double saurkraut by mistake.

True story. Maybe.

 

[Astute]

I have never deleted a post. Liar.

I have never lied about Selmayr. Liar.

I haven’t come out with misinformation. Liar.

You are a complete liar.

Where is the post I quoted of yours?

Why did you tell us that the EU commission was the final say on the Selmayr matter 3 times after seeing that the second enquiry agreed with the first each time?

OK it is truthful Mart from now

 

[Astute]

Who wants the last word then? Go on, I'll have it.

You normally do. And it is backing up someone who is pro EU whatever happens each time.

 

[Grendel]

Who wants the last word then? Go on, I'll have it.

Is that your Final Solution?

 

[Astute]

Another lie. I did quote the the original EC argumentation as balance against your rabid accusations, something you didn’t do Mr Neutral, but the main quote saying „possibly even“ that I quoted came from the initial ombudsman’s report. It was the law quote not the regulations that was quoted by me. You are twisting yet again to claim that I am a liar.

My rabid accusations that both enquiries agreed on you mean? And MEP's voting for Selmayr to go. Only 12 voting for Selmayr out of over 500 and 10 of them were affiliated to Selmayr and Juncker?

So now you admit that what you call rabid accusations that I come out with are actually the truth. But those who run the EU still try to say nothing was wrong although two enquiries have found it to be wrong in law as well as procedures.

 

[Deleted member 5849]

You normally do.

You've lost it completely and are behaving like a total dick. For god's sake man, have a day off!

(Mart, have a day off too, before I get accused of bias and always supporting you! Stop doing the same!)

 

[Deleted member 5849]

Is that your Final Solution?

I actually chuckled.

From a place of darkness.

 

[martcov]

Where is the post I quoted of yours?

Why did you tell us that the EU commission was the final say on the Selmayr matter 3 times after seeing that the second enquiry agreed with the first each time?

OK it is truthful Mart from now

I never said the first report was still current after seeing the second report. I posted something after the second report before I got the second report. Which I first got a couple of days after it’s release as I was working. Then corrected it to agree with the new report. I have no motive to pretend something when the report is in the public domain, but your comprehension is terrible. You call ignorance of a recent change lying. You still have yet to apologise for your lies about me.

 

[Deleted member 5849]

Christ alive.

 

[martcov]

So you might not be a liar as a Nazi somewhere might have said what you said they did?

I rest my case.

No might about it. Nazis said what a said they said. There are quotes on here. You have no case.

 

[Astute]

You've lost it completely and are behaving like a total dick. For god's sake man, have a day off!

(Mart, have a day off too, before I get accused of bias and always supporting you! Stop doing the same!)

I haven't lost it.

I detest liars and lying. Look at Mart still trying to make out that there was nothing wrong with the appointment of Selmayr. Look at what else he comes out with. I can understand a mistake. But a year later coming out with the same diatribe? Then others agree with what he says.

It is an absolute joke.

 

[Deleted member 5849]

I might go and buy some Bratwurst later. Quite fancy a large sausage.

No euphemisms in there, either!

 

[Deleted member 5849]

I haven't lost it.

You bloody well have.. Look, for your own sake, pause and stop.

If not for your own sake, think of the other readers who are begging for this utter shite to stop.

 

[martcov]

Where is the post I quoted of yours?

Why did you tell us that the EU commission was the final say on the Selmayr matter 3 times after seeing that the second enquiry agreed with the first each time?

OK it is truthful Mart from now

I don’t know where the post is. I explained several times that the second report came whilst I was working. I corrected myself as soon as I got the verdict. You still haven’t apologized for your deliberate smears and lies.

 

[Astute]

No might about it. Nazis said what a said they said. There are quotes on here. You have no case.

How about showing evidence for once or stop digging a bigger hole. So what if you made wrong comments. The worse is you feel as though you have to keep them up.

 

[Deleted member 5849]

I see the policy for an orderly Brexit, get Astute and mart to bore the continent into submission!