I like how you claimed I remembered something when I never said I remembered it.

That's called making an inference. You know, like inferring your sealed border will result in deportations of those who attempt to break the seal. A common sense inference considering what the definition of a sealed border is.

Why are you allowed to making inferences and suggestions about my positions but when I do you for much more straight forward inferences you repeatedly call me a liar 50 times?

Are you then a liar for continually making inferences about my positions based on words I never said?

Putin you are peoven to be a liar yet again. On the 21 st of October 2012 you wrote this in a thread entitled South Africa:

''Which isn't surprising considering Fulham also questioned the number of deaths in the Holocaust.

http://webdiplomacy.net/forum.php?threadID=716401#717424''

I replied with this:

''PUTIN WRITES THIS: ''Which isn't surprising considering Fulham also questioned the number of deaths in the Holocaust.

http://webdiplomacy.net/forum.php?threadID=716401#717424''

This is the record of what I actually wrote in that thread, I challenge Putin to say something different:


Darwyn gave this as a reference:

From 4 million in 1945 (http://www.vanguardnewsnetwork.com/wolzek/1948_AuschwitzPlaque.html)...

to 1-1/2 million in 1990 (http://www.vanguardnewsnetwork.com/wolzek/1990_AuschwitzPlaque.html).

I recomend that, unless you are intersted in reading a selection of sickening racist diatribes, you steer well clear of his references.

AND

Santa I am not sure that I understand your response to my post. Could you please explain?

AND

Santa, I accept your apology, it's no problem. I understand your anger, even if it was misdirected on this occassion.

AND

I think that it is difficult to get an accurate death count because of the horrendous and varied nature of the killing. 5-6 million Jews (including c. 1 million children) are the constraints placed on it by reasonable historians. I think that these parameters have been arrived at by comparing pre- and post-war census records as well as the records kept by the Nazis themselves. Given the robustness of the evidence, I think thart one must question the motivation of those who wish to dispute it.

AND

Santa writes - ''My grandmother was in the camps, and before she died she had hallucinations of Nazis coming to kill her''

My father was among thr first to enter Belsen (n.b., liberated by the British) and the memories have never left him. Here is a flavour of them -
http://www.bbc.co.uk/archive/holocaust/5111.shtml

Now it is obvious from the written record that Putin is indeed both a twister and a liar. There can be no clearer proof.''

You never change your lying spots Putin do you?

No where in that thread you linked twice did I say what you claimed I said. So if that's a gotcha, it's a failed one.

Instead what I found was you using a Holocaust remembrance thread to peddle your usual anti-Darwin garbage. Because that's you being non-confrontational.

And where did I call you a racist in this thread, twister/liar? Where did I say I remembered this exchange, twister/liar?

Heal thyself, doctor.

And answer my question I've posed to you now a dozen times, since you're so in favor of honestly and oppose "dragging".

Fulham keeps dodging and weaving, after mocking me for him supposedly having to "drag" information out of me, because he asked me about it once and I replied immediately.

****How do you seal a border without deportations???****
****How do you seal a border without deportations???****
****How do you seal a border without deportations???****

Enough with the insults, enough with the obfuscation, answer the question.

You said it alright, as I said on the 21 st October 2012 page 7 of 8 in the South Africa thread around four or five posts from the top of that page. You are a nasty little evasive liar.

See it now?

Heal thyself indeed. Here is what you wrote a couple of hours ago:
''Immigration needs to be gradual and diverse to facilitate integration, emphasis on integration.

I think most people accept that unregulated mass immigration concentrated largely from one group is not workable. ''

Did I wade in and imply you were a racist in favour of deportation? No I didn't..

Here are my oening two statements;

''Pretty clear that you guys have hit peak water in the west. Should that be factored into the discussion? '' AND ''@ PE, you are quite right about kicking the problem down the road. This is even more to the point in the UK. We are sitting on a time bomb.''

To which you responded with this: ''Immigration is a time bomb but climate change is overhyped.

Your priorities are fascinating. ''

Followed up, after a little diversion on climate change by this:

''In all honesty you do not talk. You just engage in a series of monologues.

But yes all of that is very interesting. We should ignore AGW as propaganda and concentrate on deporting immigrants. And you're on the left?''

So you tellme how to use your words I was ''concentrating on deporting immigrants''.
I think that you are blind to your own incoherance. Oh and have you found that thread yet?

You've only linked 1 thread there fulhamish.

Yes I got the links wrong, please bear with my poor IT skills. However, rest assured that Putin's post is there, exactly where I say it is

"See it now?"

Nope. You appear to be confusing me with Santa Clausewitz. Perhaps I am being blamed for Santa's mistake. Wouldn't surprise me. After all, you're so very keen on getting your facts and citations straight.

"Did I wade in and imply you were a racist in favour of deportation? No I didn't.."

Because I didn't insist on sealing the border, genius. I've emphatically argued *in favor of immigration* on here. You called for the *sealing of the borders*. Why don't you bother explaining what a sealed border means and why that doesn't *imply* deportations? How come you're allowed to imply but nobody else is?

Why don't you ever bother answering questions but accuse other people of "dragging" and being "evasive"? How come you're allowed to make suggestions & implications from stuff people didn't say but yet you fulminate about it if that's done to you? Why are standards never applied to you?

"So you tellme how to use your words I was ''concentrating on deporting immigrants''."

I've asked repeatedly how a sealed border, *which is the policy you advocate*, can be done without *deportations*.

So I've told you repeatedly how deportations are implied by a sealed border. You haven't bothered to dispute that. You just rant and rave.

" However, rest assured that Putin's post is there, exactly where I say it is"

Rest assured you attributed a mistake made my Santa to me, and if I quoted from Santa, that's the best you can do. Meanwhile, you repeatedly make insinuations about other people and you make no apologies for them.

I think it's quite clear from this thread how Fulham operates. In his pathetic efforts to play gotcha, he has revealed himself to be the very example of everything he criticizes.

"I think most people accept that unregulated mass immigration concentrated largely from one group is not workable. ''

But it is okay for US citizens to band together in rural America into like minded group and force out the local population like the white supremacy, neo-Nazi, Aryan nation, and other religious cult groups. Because these people are here legally and just intend to take over the country.

Also it okay to be an illegal immigrant if you are white and come from a country like Canada or Europe to take away jobs here in the US. Unless you were from a group that people here don't like, for example Jews before WW II.

"
But it is okay for US citizens to band together in rural America into like minded group and force out the local population like the white supremacy, neo-Nazi, Aryan nation, and other religious cult groups. Because these people are here legally and just intend to take over the country."

No, it's not ok. I fail to see how you deduced that from what I said.

"Also it okay to be an illegal immigrant if you are white and come from a country like Canada or Europe to take away jobs here in the US."

You missed the part about high concentrations coming from one group. Historically unregulated white immigration coming from one group has also caused problems. See the history of mass Irish immigration in the 1850s after the famine. Sudden mass concentrations of Mormons in certain states have also caused social tensions, leading to their expulsion in places like Missouri.

It's better for the immigrant communities involved if they're integrated. They would be protected and not seen as alien and threatening, wouldn't you agree?

Sociologically you cannot expect miracles.

"Unless you were from a group that people here don't like, for example Jews before WW II."

Tons of Jewish refugees came to the US during the pogroms of the early 1900s. The population went from 1 million people in 1900 to 3.5 million in 1920.

Also it is inaccurate to assume all immigration from Mexico is non-white. Mexico is a racially mixed society with plenty of people of European descent.

"No, it's not ok. I fail to see how you deduced that from what I said."

Go read J. Swift's suggestion on feeding the Irish for how to extrapolate to that type of deduction.

"It's better for the immigrant communities involved if they're integrated. They would be protected and not seen as alien and threatening, wouldn't you agree?"

But that's exactly what isn't happening. Instead you are getting congregations of like minded or ethic groups occurring where they are isolating themselves and then trying to takeover.

After the 1920s the US put numerical restrictions on the immigrations from countries. The SS St. Louis was an example, see the movie "Voyage of the Damned," where a Jewish refugee ship was turned back first at Cuba and then the US before those that hadn't been allowed to land in Cuba landed in Europe and tried to make their way to Switzerland to be interned in Swiss labor camps.

"Go read J. Swift's suggestion on feeding the Irish for how to extrapolate to that type of deduction."

I have enough to do without being given a reading list. Explain how I'm endorsing white supremacist take-overs of localities.

"But that's exactly what isn't happening. Instead you are getting congregations of like minded or ethic groups occurring where they are isolating themselves and then trying to takeover."

I agree this isn't happening, which is why I'm saying mass unregulated immigration is a social problem. My comment was not descriptive, it was a policy recommendation. How you get from that to me endorsing white supremacist gangs is beyond me.

"After the 1920s the US put numerical restrictions on the immigrations from countries."

Yes because we had 2-3 decades of a sudden mass of unregulated immigration mainly from one area of Europe from the 1890s-1920s. If immigration is not turned gradual and diversified, reactionaries will shut the whole thing down. We went from having less than 250,000 immigrants from southern & eastern Europe to nearly 6 million in the span of a couple decades.