Well that then asks the question are you registered and have legal ststus within the UK?
Or no N.I. contribs?
Brexit, for once some facts.
- Thread starter flecc
- Start date
Or no N.I. contribs?
Using the word lying is a bit strong when someone is engaging in a live verbal debate. In his contribution, Farage had just insulted that MP ,so maybe his comment was confused.
[/QUOTE]
What are you getting at? the paper reported what had been said without commenting and for your education this is my original post in it's entirety
Today at 8:14 AM
#49,538
Here for your delectation a tale of Mr Toad's cunning Tax Dodge
https://www.theguardian.com/politic...ge-company-thorn-in-the-side-assets-up-400000
Note: no comment from me required, is it?
And you failed completely to understand the message, didn't you?
I was more interested in this
"The MEP has previously admitted setting up a trust fund in an offshore tax haven that could have enabled him to cut his tax bill. Farage, who condemned tax avoiders in a speech to the European parliament, said in 2013 that he paid a tax adviser to set up the Farage Family Educational Trust 1654 in the Isle of Man. He has denied benefiting from the arrangement and said he made a loss.
Farage complained in 2017 that he was “53, separated and skint” in an interview with the Daily Mail, adding: “There’s no money in politics.”"
When the headline read this
"
'Skint' Nigel Farage's company assets grew almost £400k last year
Brexiter’s firm had assets of £548,573 five months after MEP claimed he had no money
And you were so busy trying to attack me you missed the Elephant in the room despite my broad hint
"a tale of Mr Toad's cunning Tax Dodge"
You disappoint me as usual.
I read it immediately after he posted it and didn't see any distortion or attempt at it. The meaning was absolutely clear.
And he linked to the article so it could be seen in it's entirety, enabling me to read it all.
.
Where does the bad grammar come in? I wasn't even alluding to the speech, just his dodgy claims to be skint with a company rolling in money, and both you and Zlatan ignored that to pick a fight!
I though I made myself clear with "
a tale of Mr Toad's cunning Tax Dodge"
Clearly it wasn't simple enough, and yet it was the headline!
This Forum is like the House of Commons, you can't get a decent opposition, just a circus act
First time I have been attacked with "Instant Uncriticism" is it some form of "collateral damage"?
I have covered this there was no lie it was not even the point I was trying to make anyway
Farage's bank account is a matter or record not lies or fabrications so where is the lie?
Stop digging the water is coming in
Spare yourself further embarassment
Last edited:
tommie said: Well that then asks the question are you registered and have legal ststus within the UK?
Or no N.I. contribs?
Or no N.I. contribs?
No coded msg only a couple of questions which are relevant - but i understand completely why you didn`t answer - Nuff said!!
This is a complete fabrication by Verhofstadt. Yet the Guardian reported it and then linked those comments to Farage's swelling bank account and even printed amounts. You might think thats good journalism. It isnt.
It was done in an effort to discredit Farage and you know it but it supports your view of him so forget the truth.
Why give links to lies OG?[/QUOTE]
Once again - Guardian reported what Farage said and what Verhofstadt said both in public - as journalists have a habit of doing when reporting on events.
Would you have prefered them to have ommited what one or the other said?
Again which video of the EU debate did you watch? - as I mentioned before RT.com (funnily enough ;-) had a one-sided video published on WooTube featuring just Farage prattling on and NOT Verhofstadt's response. If you did just so happen to watch the rt.com version no wonder you worked yourself into a lather that there was more to it when OG posted what he did.
Do you ever stop trolling? I get the attempt to bully others off the thread. I find it quite reprehensible.
I like that, very funny, I shall amuse my friends who actually know me with that one.
May I point out a slight drawback? we are down to one plan already, and only one person wants that
It's all very democratic on the "one person, one vote" principle
TM is the one person and she has the one vote.
looked at logically she can't fail to get her plan accepted can she.?
Sorry, just my sense of humour getting out of hand, horrifically it is too close to the truth for comfort.
I take the presence of these camp followers as an encouraging sign of the popularity of the thread, and it does give us a golden opportunity to help them undermine the leave cause, each time they come up with what they believe is a convincing reason that makes Brexit a good idea, that is so easily shot down.
That's why we get the sniping from them, frustration has set in.
Hardly his fault, five of the posts were responses to attacks and the others commenting on the attacks.
Simple answer to those ganging up, stop attacking at every imagined opportunity.
.
Right ,the facts of the tiff between OG ,Fingers ,Zlathan. The BBC is currently broadcasting it....
The entire debate of 13th. March shown in sequence has Guy V. Making assertions about Nigel F. These assertions were robust and suggested that he had an interest in disrupting the EU and an interest in making money from it. After a number of other speakers presented their views Nigel F had a right of reply,..which is the piece presented in the RT segement. In this he with some level of humour refuted Guy, V s position.
The Guardian reported this correctly.
No lies, no bad faith...
Both parties OG on one side,and the combined forces on the other side,need to kiss and make up
The entire debate of 13th. March shown in sequence has Guy V. Making assertions about Nigel F. These assertions were robust and suggested that he had an interest in disrupting the EU and an interest in making money from it. After a number of other speakers presented their views Nigel F had a right of reply,..which is the piece presented in the RT segement. In this he with some level of humour refuted Guy, V s position.
The Guardian reported this correctly.
No lies, no bad faith...
Both parties OG on one side,and the combined forces on the other side,need to kiss and make up
Last edited: