Blueshoe wrote: » Oh but you did
Woodsie1 wrote: » So you think words are worse than assaults?
Joeytheparrot wrote: » Ye wha?
Joeytheparrot wrote: » No. I didnt.
Blueshoe wrote: » Yeah you did. And you even took the time to go back and edit it after being shown to be spreading lies. That's just sad. Be man enough to stand by what you wrote.
Woodsie1 wrote: » Well your here crying about threats and not bothered about the assault.
Joeytheparrot wrote: » I never said any such thing. Stop making stuff up about me. You are the one spreading lies here.
Joeytheparrot wrote: » So you put words into my mouth?
Blueshoe wrote: » You definitely did pal. No doubt about it. I read it and knew it was a lie. Once called out on it you edited it.
Joeytheparrot wrote: » I'm not your Pal and I definitely did not. Stop making up lies.
Blueshoe wrote: » 100% you did. No doubt Boards needs a marker beside comments to show they have been edited. So did was Croft condoning arson attacks on refugee accommodation with the people inside or no?
Joeytheparrot wrote: » knipex wrote: » I'm no fan of him or the bat sh** unicorn fantasizing rainbow obsessed anti vax wingnut but that statement is just not true.. Have you seen the video ?? He was talking about people in the area who were threatening to burn down the building, I think he mentioned "just like back in the day" but never finished because of the milkshake.. At no point was there are mention on anyone being in the building.. That doesnt make it alright though. He still supports arson of dp centres. He still violently threatened his curry coke milkshake attacker. Hes a racist thug.
knipex wrote: » I'm no fan of him or the bat sh** unicorn fantasizing rainbow obsessed anti vax wingnut but that statement is just not true.. Have you seen the video ?? He was talking about people in the area who were threatening to burn down the building, I think he mentioned "just like back in the day" but never finished because of the milkshake.. At no point was there are mention on anyone being in the building..
Joeytheparrot wrote: » So you think itsok that he violently threatened to choke her?
Joeytheparrot wrote: » You may have mistaken my post with someone elsehttps://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=110606312&postcount=430
recedite wrote: » Simply not true.
trixiebust wrote: » I think everyone has decided this will be a Gemma bashing thread. It's clear from the first post that's what this is, just like the previous one. No one here likes to admit it, but she has a growing following. Maybe not here but certainly elsewhere, & it's not because of her unicorn stuff either. Sad how many Irish people are asleep to the stuff that's going on in a tiny island like ours & then people get targeted as racist for having a differing opinion.
King Mob wrote: » Speaking of... Any chance you're going back to explain why you claimed that Kellogg's was dropping its halal certification due to concerns about funding terrorism when the article you linked said nothing of the sort and even directly contradicted that claim?
Halal Certification Authority president Mohamed Elmouelhy said a public campaign against halal certification may have made companies think twice.'Yes, of course. There was a campaign,' he told Daily Mail Australia. Mr Elmouelhy has declined the reveal the details of his clients or where his halal fees went.
King Mob wrote: » Could you also maybe go back and address some of those other points your ignoring?
Blueshoe wrote: » Nope definitely you. No answer for my question either? Wasn't really expecting one tbh. Not your style
trixiebust wrote: » Could you explain why you think he is racist?
recedite wrote: » https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4702446/Kellogg-s-Sanitarium-shun-halal-certification-fees.html You're gas; every time you cast doubt on something I said, I go back and give you a link or a statistic addressing the exact point in question. Then you just pretend I didn't. Pigeon Chess, as somebody said earlier.
King Mob wrote: » Except that's not what happened. You provided a link that did not contain the information you said it did. The link you provided previously made no mention of the funding of terrorism and in fact stated that the reason the certification stopped was due to commerical reasons. This new link makes the claim that the reason was due to terrorism concerns, but that seems to be more just supposition on the Daily Mails part. It is also again contradicted by the companies themselves. They don't seem to be even able to point to this supposed public outcry aside from notable Aussie racist and national embarassment Paula Hanson. Not exactly a good person to hitch your wagon too if you still want to pretend racism doesnt have anything to do with your position. And the actual evidence that any of the money goes anywhere near terrorism? Non existant. Its the Daily Mail after all. So no, you have not addressed the point before or now. Your links do not contain what you say they contain. This is on top of the other points you are just pretending dont exist. Like for example me poinying out the hypocracy of bringing up something about Austrailia when only a few posts ago you were moaning about me pointing to UK statistics. You did not address this at all and actually just editted around it. Posting random links from the big list of negative muslim stories you or Gemma compile is not addressing stuff. Your basically just a twitter bot for a racist conspiracy monger.
King Mob wrote: » This new link makes the claim that the reason was due to terrorism concerns, but that seems to be more just supposition on the Daily Mails part. It is also again contradicted by the companies themselves.
recedite wrote: » Gemma has spoiled that for them somewhat, by alerting the rest of us, but that's what journalists are supposed to do.
The Nal wrote: » Oh Jesus. A salespersons dream you are. So easily swayed, so easily manipulated, so gullible.
Blueshoe wrote: » Some people might be interested in knowing that Brennan's have decided to become Halal certified. It's not something that rte are going to report on is it
recedite wrote: » It is not contradicted by Kelloggs. They cited "marketing" and "commercial concerns".
'This was a commercial decision, not the result of any public pressure or backlash.'
recedite wrote: » The Halal certifier guy (whose quote I linked to) admitted that the negative consumer feedback had outweighed any commercial advantage Kelloggs was getting in Australia.
recedite wrote: » He declined to say where the money was going. Then he tried to say that taking the Indonesia and Malaysia markets into the equation would tip the balance back in favour of Team Halal, but Kelloggs have obviously made that calculation and disagree.
recedite wrote: » As I mentioned earlier in this thread, it was clever marketing by Brennans Bread to market their Halal certificates in certain circles only, thereby "having their cake and eating it" as they say. Which they managed to get away with for 2 or 3 years.
ohnonotgmail wrote: » I think recedite posts those links in the hope that nobody actually reads them.
King Mob wrote: » You assume he reads them?
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w8.vanillicon.com/v2/867a9f20e705add43a3ada2e4f4480cc.svg)
