Another day, another terrorist antisemite murderer

First topic message reminder :

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6065261/Corbyn-shared-platform-Palestinian-group-murdered-British-rabbi.html
on a daily basis corbyns friends come out of the woodwork showing he has a total lack of judgement at best, or is a vile antisemitic terrorist supporting anti western bigot at worst.

Didge wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:Also... just out of interest... anyone know what the date and time of this wreath laying event was...?

Yes 

Sept 2014

Is this again you avoiding my questions and evidence?

Thanks... but can you be more precise as to what date in Sept and what time it was...?


And I'm not avoiding anything... all you have done is post up a different picture and some irrelevant comments about it...


Irrelevant because we are talking about the picture in the OP... and the 'mystery legs' in THAT particular picture... while you are trying to talk about a different picture, that you yourself posted, and which isn't what the rest of us are trying to discuss...!

Didge wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

Do I really need to? I've always said that I think he's an IRA sympathiser. Enough said. Nothing would surprise me about him. He won't answer questions properly, and he insists that he was laying a wreath to commemorate victims of 1985, but he's obviously not laying a wreath in the correct place. I have no idea if he deliberately laid a wreath in honour of those terrorists or if he was just confused about where he was.

So why are you defending and unfounded claim that defends him by Tommy?

As if this was staged?

You know he has been complicit in such support, so why now question a claim so wacky by Tommy?

When other pictures prove you wrong?

To claim the wrong place is beliving him, when you know he has supported the IRA

How gullible are you

I wasn't defending anyone. I merely said that there were legs but no body.

The question is - did he actually know he was laying a wreath at the graves of the terrorists, or was he told that's where wreaths are generally laid or something?

Raggamuffin wrote:

Didge wrote:


So why are you defending and unfounded claim that defends him by Tommy?

As if this was staged?

You know he has been complicit in such support, so why now question a claim so wacky by Tommy?

When other pictures prove you wrong?

To claim the wrong place is beliving him, when you know he has supported the IRA

How gullible are you

I wasn't defending anyone. I merely said that there were legs but no body.

The question is - did he actually know he was laying a wreath at the graves of the terrorists, or was he told that's where wreaths are generally laid or something?

But did you even queestion the reasons whyyou could not see the body?

Yes or no?

The answer is no and you took at face value a conspircy loon

The question here is why, ae you allowing me to tie you up in knots?

You are normally better than this in debate?

Didge wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

I wasn't defending anyone. I merely said that there were legs but no body.

The question is - did he actually know he was laying a wreath at the graves of the terrorists, or was he told that's where wreaths are generally laid or something?

But did you even queestion the reasons whyyou could not see the body?

Yes or no?

The answer is no and you took at face value a conspircy loon

The question here is why, ae you allowing me to tie you up in knots?

You are normally better than this in debate?

You're not tying anyone up in knots, you're just getting confused.

Tommy Monk wrote:

Didge wrote:


Yes 

Sept 2014

Is this again you avoiding my questions and evidence?

Thanks... but can you be more precise as to what date in Sept and what time it was...?


And I'm not avoiding anything... all you have done is post up a different picture and some irrelevant comments about it...


Irrelevant because we are talking about the picture in the OP... and the 'mystery legs' in THAT particular picture... while you are trying to talk about a different picture, that you yourself posted, and which isn't what the rest of us are trying to discuss...!

Well can you explain what relevance the date has to you here, when Corbyn, admitted he did lay a wreath here in this year at this cemetry?

Seriously?

We are talking about your paranoia, where there is many pictires which he admits attending

Of which he has not denied any of them

So I am at a loss as to why you think they are not relevant?

Tommy Monk wrote:

Didge wrote:


Yes 

Sept 2014

Is this again you avoiding my questions and evidence?

Thanks... but can you be more precise as to what date in Sept and what time it was...?


And I'm not avoiding anything... all you have done is post up a different picture and some irrelevant comments about it...


Irrelevant because we are talking about the picture in the OP... and the 'mystery legs' in THAT particular picture... while you are trying to talk about a different picture, that you yourself posted, and which isn't what the rest of us are trying to discuss...!

Exactly. I've also discussed the issue of the laying of the wreath, but Didge seems to think I'm defending Corbyn for some reason, even though I said he clearly didn't lay a wreath at the memorial plaque of those killed in 1985. He's just confused.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Didge wrote:


But did you even queestion the reasons whyyou could not see the body?

Yes or no?

The answer is no and you took at face value a conspircy loon

The question here is why, ae you allowing me to tie you up in knots?

You are normally better than this in debate?

You're not tying anyone up in knots, you're just getting confused.

is that why you continually fail to answer my points?

Didge wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:


Thanks... but can you be more precise as to what date in Sept and what time it was...?


And I'm not avoiding anything... all you have done is post up a different picture and some irrelevant comments about it...


Irrelevant because we are talking about the picture in the OP... and the 'mystery legs' in THAT particular picture... while you are trying to talk about a different picture, that you yourself posted, and which isn't what the rest of us are trying to discuss...!

Well can you explain what relevance the date has to you here, when Corbyn, admitted he did lay a wreath here in this year at this cemetry?

Seriously?

We are talking about your paranoia, where there is many pictires which he admits attending

Of which he has not denied any of them

So I am at a loss as to why you think they are not relevant?

But there are different areas at the cemetery. What he's denying is that he laid a wreath to commemorate the terrorists.

Didge wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

You're not tying anyone up in knots, you're just getting confused.

is that why you continually fail to answer my points?

Your points have no relevance because you keep talking about a completely different photograph.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:


Thanks... but can you be more precise as to what date in Sept and what time it was...?


And I'm not avoiding anything... all you have done is post up a different picture and some irrelevant comments about it...


Irrelevant because we are talking about the picture in the OP... and the 'mystery legs' in THAT particular picture... while you are trying to talk about a different picture, that you yourself posted, and which isn't what the rest of us are trying to discuss...!

Exactly. I've also discussed the issue of the laying of the wreath, but Didge seems to think I'm defending Corbyn for some reason, even though I said he clearly didn't lay a wreath at the memorial plaque of those killed in 1985. He's just confused.

Well Corbyn has admitted he was there. He has not denied the pictures, nor has labour

So what point is Tommy making?

That Corbyn, is so stupid, he has not pulled up what wierd and wacky claim Tommy is making?

Its not even worth arguing, its dumb to say the least and has Tommy go to extremes to back his warped paranoia

He has negated one factor in his paranopia

Corbyn

Didge wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

Exactly. I've also discussed the issue of the laying of the wreath, but Didge seems to think I'm defending Corbyn for some reason, even though I said he clearly didn't lay a wreath at the memorial plaque of those killed in 1985. He's just confused.

Well Corbyn has admitted he was there. He has not denied the pictures, nor has labour

So what point is Tommy making?

That Corbyn, is so stupid, he has not pulled up what wierd and wacky claim Tommy is making?

Its not even worth arguing, its dumb to say the least and has Tommy go to extremes to back his warped paranoia

He has negated one factor in his paranopia

Corbyn

What claim which Tommy is making? We're discussing some legs without a body, that's all.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Didge wrote:


Well can you explain what relevance the date has to you here, when Corbyn, admitted he did lay a wreath here in this year at this cemetry?

Seriously?

We are talking about your paranoia, where there is many pictires which he admits attending

Of which he has not denied any of them

So I am at a loss as to why you think they are not relevant?

But there are different areas at the cemetery. What he's denying is that he laid a wreath to commemorate the terrorists.

I agree and he was at the graves of those who orchestrated Black September and even prayed an islamic prayer over their graves

Raggamuffin wrote:

Didge wrote:


is that why you continually fail to answer my points?

Your points have no relevance because you keep talking about a completely different photograph.

Coput, misdirection and being pathetic, failingt to answer points

Try agauin

Raggamuffin wrote:

Didge wrote:


Well Corbyn has admitted he was there. He has not denied the pictures, nor has labour

So what point is Tommy making?

That Corbyn, is so stupid, he has not pulled up what wierd and wacky claim Tommy is making?

Its not even worth arguing, its dumb to say the least and has Tommy go to extremes to back his warped paranoia

He has negated one factor in his paranopia

Corbyn

What claim which Tommy is making? We're discussing some legs without a body, that's all.

Incorrect, you are claiming a photo has been shopped anbd believe nobody is behind corbyn

I shopwed there was people behind him

So we are talking about your paranoia here

Didge wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

But there are different areas at the cemetery. What he's denying is that he laid a wreath to commemorate the terrorists.

I agree and he was at the graves of those who orchestrated Black September and even prayed an islamic prayer over their graves

Yes, I also think he was, but did he know whose graves they were? According to the BBC video which I linked to, the dignitaries stand in that spot every year to remember those who were killed in Israeli airstrikes. I don't know why, but that's the claim.

Didge wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

What claim which Tommy is making? We're discussing some legs without a body, that's all.

Incorrect, you are claiming a photo has been shopped anbd believe nobody is behind corbyn

I shopwed there was people behind him

So we are talking about your paranoia here

Irrelevant as you showed a different photo with Corbyn in a different spot.

He's in a different spot in each photo.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Didge wrote:


I agree and he was at the graves of those who orchestrated Black September and even prayed an islamic prayer over their graves

Yes, I also think he was, but did he know whose graves they were? According to the BBC video which I linked to, the dignitaries stand in that spot every year to remember those who were killed in Israeli airstrikes. I don't know why, but that's the claim.

We do know the graves

The BBC has bee complicit in defending Corbyn here

Do you want the evidence?

I have already posted this

Didge is definitely confused... as all I've said is in the OP pic it looks like there are a set of 'mystery legs', and I asked 'if maybe someone had been airbrushed out?'...!


Then I asked 'what was the date and time of the event?'...!

Raggamuffin wrote:

Didge wrote:


Incorrect, you are claiming a photo has been shopped anbd believe nobody is behind corbyn

I shopwed there was people behind him

So we are talking about your paranoia here

Irrelevant as you showed a different photo with Corbyn in a different spot.

How?

When your claim is based on what?

Not being able to see behind Corbyn?

And yet in other phostos we see people behind him

I have actual evuidence, you back paranoia

Raggamuffin wrote:He's in a different spot in each photo.

So is others

Lol

Is that your evicdence?

Seriously?

Didge wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

Yes, I also think he was, but did he know whose graves they were? According to the BBC video which I linked to, the dignitaries stand in that spot every year to remember those who were killed in Israeli airstrikes. I don't know why, but that's the claim.

We do know the graves

The BBC has bee complicit in defending Corbyn here

Do you want the evidence?

I have already posted this

We know the graves because we've been told whose graves they are, but did Corbyn know at the time? Did he know he was laying a wreath on a plaque dedicated to terrorists or was he told it was a memorial to those who died in Israeli airstrikes?

Raggamuffin wrote:

Didge wrote:


So why are you defending and unfounded claim that defends him by Tommy?

As if this was staged?

You know he has been complicit in such support, so why now question a claim so wacky by Tommy?

When other pictures prove you wrong?

To claim the wrong place is beliving him, when you know he has supported the IRA

How gullible are you

I wasn't defending anyone. I merely said that there were legs but no body.

The question is - did he actually know he was laying a wreath at the graves of the terrorists, or was he told that's where wreaths are generally laid or something?

are you suggesting corbyn is too stupid to know what is going on around him. It might explain why he has been a member of so many antisemitic social media groups and turned up at so many terrorist events. Alzheimer's is a terrible affliction.

Tommy Monk wrote:Didge is definitely confused... as all I've said is in the OP pic it looks like there are a set of 'mystery legs', and I asked 'if maybe someone had been airbrushed out?'...!


Then I asked 'what was the date and time of the event?'...!

Oooooh, you now say looks

So where I have shown other people there, why is it that your view to airbrush, is easily mistaken?

Tommy Monk wrote:Didge is definitely confused... as all I've said is in the OP pic it looks like there are a set of 'mystery legs', and I asked 'if maybe someone had been airbrushed out?'...!


Then I asked 'what was the date and time of the event?'...!

Didge clearly has no idea what he's talking about now. He thinks two photos are the same, and he's totally confused. I'll leave you to try to talk some sense into him. Good luck with that.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Didge wrote:


We do know the graves

The BBC has bee complicit in defending Corbyn here

Do you want the evidence?

I have already posted this

We know the graves because we've been told whose graves they are, but did Corbyn know at the time? Did he know he was laying a wreath on a plaque dedicated to terrorists or was he told it was a memorial to those who died in Israeli airstrikes?

Really?

By the BBC

He did not Know?



He was at evenet and even wrote about what wreaths he layed in the Morning Star at the time

Or did you not know this?

Its why Tommy, is about to look very stupid on this

The Devil, You Know wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

I wasn't defending anyone. I merely said that there were legs but no body.

The question is - did he actually know he was laying a wreath at the graves of the terrorists, or was he told that's where wreaths are generally laid or something?

are you suggesting corbyn is too stupid to know what is going on around him. It might explain why he has been a member of so many antisemitic social media groups and turned up at so many terrorist events. Alzheimer's is a terrible affliction.

Well it's not beyond the realms of possibility is it? If he thought he was laying a wreath at a memorial to those killed in airstrikes, he should just say so rather than try to change the subject.

He doesn't have Alzheimer's though.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:Didge is definitely confused... as all I've said is in the OP pic it looks like there are a set of 'mystery legs', and I asked 'if maybe someone had been airbrushed out?'...!


Then I asked 'what was the date and time of the event?'...!

Didge clearly has no idea what he's talking about now. He thinks two photos are the same, and he's totally confused. I'll leave you to try to talk some sense into him. Good luck with that.

Ahhhh bless, seek back up, when didge has show Tommy to be clueless and paranoid here

Again did Tommy rule out the possibility that there is actually people behind?

Or did he eat some magix mushroooms and then believe he saw floating legs behind corbyn?

Did he actually consider his views were wrong?

No and this is the point here. Tommy, has wild fanatsies here and its hilarious

Raggamuffin wrote:

The Devil, You Know wrote:
are you suggesting corbyn is too stupid to know what is going on around him. It might explain why he has been a member of so many antisemitic social media groups and turned up at so many terrorist events. Alzheimer's is a terrible affliction.

Well it's not beyond the realms of possibility is it? If he thought he was laying a wreath at a memorial to those killed in airstrikes, he should just say so rather than try to change the subject.

He doesn't have Alzheimer's though.

'Is it beyond the ealms of possibility that you and TOMMY ARE GULLIBLE HERE?

Or at least majorly paranoid?

I'd rather talk to someone who understands the points I'm making Didge. That isn't you.

Raggamuffin wrote:

The Devil, You Know wrote:
are you suggesting corbyn is too stupid to know what is going on around him. It might explain why he has been a member of so many antisemitic social media groups and turned up at so many terrorist events. Alzheimer's is a terrible affliction.

Well it's not beyond the realms of possibility is it? If he thought he was laying a wreath at a memorial to those killed in airstrikes, he should just say so rather than try to change the subject.

He doesn't have Alzheimer's though.

lying comes naturally to him. It does disprove his asserting to be a straight talking kinda guy though. First he never laid a wreath, then he was there but he didn't think he took part, then he laid a wreath but it was for someone else. the man could get a job as a corkscrew when he eventually gets kicked out of parliament.

Didge wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

Well it's not beyond the realms of possibility is it? If he thought he was laying a wreath at a memorial to those killed in airstrikes, he should just say so rather than try to change the subject.

He doesn't have Alzheimer's though.

'Is it beyond the ealms of possibility that you and TOMMY ARE GULLIBLE HERE?

Or at least majorly paranoid?

what, for suggesting corbyn is too stupid to understand what is going on around him? If he is not that means he is fully aware of all the vile antisemites and terrorists he has associated with over the last 40 years.

Raggamuffin wrote:I'd rather talk to someone who understands the points I'm making Didge. That isn't you.

Translation

I am looking dim herwe, so if you do not mind, i am going to use you as an excuse to copout

The Devil, You Know wrote:

Didge wrote:

'Is it beyond the ealms of possibility that you and TOMMY ARE GULLIBLE HERE?

Or at least majorly paranoid?

what, for suggesting corbyn is too stupid to understand what is going on around him? If he is not that means he is fully aware of all the vile antisemites and terrorists he has associated with over the last 40 years.

They never did

We both know he does back antisemitis and terrorists

Raggamuffin wrote:

Didge wrote:


We do know the graves

The BBC has bee complicit in defending Corbyn here

Do you want the evidence?

I have already posted this

We know the graves because we've been told whose graves they are, but did Corbyn know at the time? Did he know he was laying a wreath on a plaque dedicated to terrorists or was he told it was a memorial to those who died in Israeli airstrikes?

yes of course he did and he didn't care at the time as he never thought he would be tea boy let alone leader back then.

The Devil, You Know wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

Well it's not beyond the realms of possibility is it? If he thought he was laying a wreath at a memorial to those killed in airstrikes, he should just say so rather than try to change the subject.

He doesn't have Alzheimer's though.

lying comes naturally to him. It does disprove his asserting to be a straight talking kinda guy though. First he never laid a wreath, then he was there but he didn't think he took part, then he laid a wreath but it was for someone else. the man could get a job as a corkscrew when he eventually gets kicked out of parliament.

Yes, he's been asked the question in a very straightforward manner, but he keeps saying he laid a wreath to commemorate those who were killed in an airstrike. He simply won't address the issue of where he laid the wreath, or whether or not he knew whose graves he was laying it on.

Didge wrote:

The Devil, You Know wrote:
what, for suggesting corbyn is too stupid to understand what is going on around him? If he is not that means he is fully aware of all the vile antisemites and terrorists he has associated with over the last 40 years.

They never did

We both know he does back antisemitis and terrorists

have you been on the sauce tonight as you seem to be lashing out at everyone for no apparent reason.

The Devil, You Know wrote:

Didge wrote:


They never did

We both know he does back antisemitis and terrorists

have you been on the sauce tonight as you seem to be lashing out at everyone for no apparent reason.

What sauce is that?

HP

Ketchup

Or you deflecting with idiocy?

Didge wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:Didge is definitely confused... as all I've said is in the OP pic it looks like there are a set of 'mystery legs', and I asked 'if maybe someone had been airbrushed out?'...!


Then I asked 'what was the date and time of the event?'...!

Oooooh, you now say looks

So where I have shown other people there, why is it that your view to airbrush, is easily mistaken?

What are you talking about...!?


I've said all along that in the OP pic it looks like there are a set of legs there and are missing the body & head above... looking like the body & head have been airbrushed out...!


Nothing to 'Oooooh' about now, you idiot...!


Any precise date and time yet...?

Tommy Monk wrote:

Didge wrote:



Oooooh, you now say looks

So where I have shown other people there, why is it that your view to airbrush, is easily mistaken?

What are you talking about...!?


I've said all along that in the OP pic it looks like there are a set of legs there and are missing the body & head above... looking like the body & head have been airbrushed out...!


Nothing to 'Oooooh' about now, you idiot...!


Any precise date and time yet...?

Ha ha ha ha

Looks like?

Based on what?

Again, did you take into consideration you are a paranoid loon or that again people could be in the background that you cannot see the rest of their bodies. As they are obscured by others infronts

So who is the idiot here?

Me the one that points out how you never reserached or questioned your own stupid claim

Or how evern worse you never actually looked at other pictures

This means you derived such a view, because you are constantly on smack or heroine. To the tune you now see floating legs in pictures

Didge wrote:What is even more hilarious here and how I have other photo;s proving Cornyn holding onto a wreath. Is where is the paranoid brigade to discount them?

Is their argument seriously hinged on one phote here?

Man alive, I love fuckijng with the paranoid conspiracy brigade. They never actually question the multitude off other photos from the event. They hinge their paranoid view on one photo. Ignoring the others which disprove their idiocy here

So here is a good act of faith

Will Gelico and Tommy admit they fucked up here?

Lets see

I am not exactly clear what you have pissed you panties over here. you seem to be enraged by the fact that there is a pair of legs in one picture that "appears" to have no body.
You seem to think that is somehow being used to excuse corbyns never ending disgraceful behaviour. It seems it was just a simple question by someone a little earlier and you have latched onto it like a dog with a bone. All the pictures you showed did not bring one bit of evidence, as you love to put it, to help work out whose body went with the legs, they were just pictures taken at different times during the wreath laying ceremony for the terrorists now had you got a picture of the same group with a space between those 2 blokes in front of the legs the whole issue could have been sorted out. It could be a very teeny tiny man after all, but there doesn't seem to be a very teeny tiny man in any of those other pictures. And yes dougal, we know these are small and those are very far away, but the the leg man was directly behind those other 2 not very far away.

Didge wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:


What are you talking about...!?


I've said all along that in the OP pic it looks like there are a set of legs there and are missing the body & head above... looking like the body & head have been airbrushed out...!


Nothing to 'Oooooh' about now, you idiot...!


Any precise date and time yet...?

Ha ha ha ha

Looks like?

Based on what?

Again, did you take into consideration you are a paranoid loon or that again people could be in the background that you cannot see the rest of their bodies. As they are obscured by others infronts

So who is the idiot here?

Me the one that points out how you never reserached or questioned your own stupid claim

Or how evern worse you never actually looked at other pictures

This means you derived such a view, because you are constantly on smack or heroine. To the tune you now see floating legs in pictures

you haven't researched the other pictures because if you had you would point out who the "legs" belonged to, you have just furnished a number of other pictures from the same event. Can you not actually see the legs mentioned?they are not floating, they are clearly grounded, it's the rest of the chap that seems to be the issue.

I would hazard a guess that the "dwarf" as I'll call him from now on must be 5 foot or under as corbyn is 5ft 9 and the other 2 are a similar height.

The Devil, You Know wrote:

Didge wrote:What is even more hilarious here and how I have other photo;s proving Cornyn holding onto a wreath. Is where is the paranoid brigade to discount them?

Is their argument seriously hinged on one phote here?

Man alive, I love fuckijng with the paranoid conspiracy brigade. They never actually question the multitude off other photos from the event. They hinge their paranoid view on one photo. Ignoring the others which disprove their idiocy here

So here is a good act of faith

Will Gelico and Tommy admit they fucked up here?

Lets see

I am not exactly clear what you have pissed you panties over here. you seem to be enraged by the fact that there is a pair of legs in one picture that "appears" to have no body.
You seem to think that is somehow being used to excuse corbyns never ending disgraceful behaviour. It seems it was just a simple question by someone a little earlier and you have latched onto it like a dog with a bone. All the pictures you showed did not bring one bit of evidence, as you love to put it, to help work out whose body went with the legs, they were just pictures taken at different times during the wreath laying ceremony for the terrorists now had you got a picture of the same group with a space between those 2 blokes in front of the legs the whole issue could have been sorted out. It could be a very teeny tiny man after all, but there doesn't seem to be a very teeny tiny man in any of those other pictures. And yes dougal, we know these are small and those are very far away, but the the leg man was directly behind those other 2 not very far away.

1) Do I? How is it rage by questioning such a really ridiculous point posed when as seen, they have clearly not seen other pictures?

2) I do nlove how you have become as bad as the left in how you think to make people believe what you say is how people are. Ho was I angry here, when taking the piss?

3) Is now taking the piss anger to you?

4) To me it is an exucse and as seen whym, because its based on one picture and not the many pictures of this event, which shows many people behind corbyn. Now I now you have some paranoid view also, where you simple cannot debate people and have to form views in order to downgrade them. Its only how you can debate, but lets have a reality check here

5) You have not taken into view the angles and any understanding of photogrpahy. You come out with some babble instead and neglect the view, that you now want to take the view of imbicillies, but this is your normal standing here

So on what aspect and I will ask you based on camera angles, lighting, distance here, does Tommy have a case?

Or is it you have not got a single clue and i have now sucked you into a hole?

Come on sunshine

Lets see what you really know, because i am looking forward to tearing you apart, being as most are right about you being the negative far right idiot that you are

Didge wrote:

The Devil, You Know wrote:
I am not exactly clear what you have pissed you panties over here. you seem to be enraged by the fact that there is a pair of legs in one picture that "appears" to have no body.
You seem to think that is somehow being used to excuse corbyns never ending disgraceful behaviour. It seems it was just a simple question by someone a little earlier and you have latched onto it like a dog with a bone. All the pictures you showed did not bring one bit of evidence, as you love to put it, to help work out whose body went with the legs, they were just pictures taken at different times during the wreath laying ceremony for the terrorists now had you got a picture of the same group with a space between those 2 blokes in front of the legs the whole issue could have been sorted out. It could be a very teeny tiny man after all, but there doesn't seem to be a very teeny tiny man in any of those other pictures. And yes dougal, we know these are small and those are very far away, but the the leg man was directly behind those other 2 not very far away.

1) Do I? How is it rage by questioning such a really ridiculous point posed when as seen, they have clearly not seen other pictures?

2) I do nlove how you have become as bad as the left in how you think to make people believe what you say is how people are. Ho was I angry here, when taking the piss?

3) Is now taking the piss anger to you?

4) To me it is an exucse and as seen whym, because its based on one picture and not the many pictures of this event, which shows many people behind corbyn. Now I now you have some paranoid view also, where you simple cannot debate people and have to form views in order to downgrade them. Its only how you can debate, but lets have a reality check here

5) You have not taken into view the angles and any understanding of photogrpahy. You come out with some babble instead and neglect the view, that you now want to take the view of imbicillies, but this is your normal standing here

So on what aspect and I will ask you based on camera angles, lighting, distance here, does Tommy have a case?

Or is it you have not got a single clue and i have now sucked you into a hole?

Come on sunshine

Lets see what you really know, because i am looking forward to tearing you apart, being as most are right about you being the negative far right idiot that you are

you do seem a little triggered. Perhaps it is better I wait for you to sober up so you can reflect on your foolishness.

The Devil, You Know wrote:

Didge wrote:


Ha ha ha ha

Looks like?

Based on what?

Again, did you take into consideration you are a paranoid loon or that again people could be in the background that you cannot see the rest of their bodies. As they are obscured by others infronts

So who is the idiot here?

Me the one that points out how you never reserached or questioned your own stupid claim

Or how evern worse you never actually looked at other pictures

This means you derived such a view, because you are constantly on smack or heroine. To the tune you now see floating legs in pictures

you haven't researched the other pictures because if you had you would point out who the "legs" belonged to, you have just furnished a number of other pictures from the same event. Can you not actually see the legs mentioned?they are  not floating, they are clearly grounded, it's the rest of the chap that seems to be the issue.

So I can point out to the fact that there is other people behind and can deduce it can be one of a few people

Can you actually show it is staged?

Its not down to me to prove your claim, but show an element of doubt in your claim

You do understand this basic logic mR simpleton?

The onus is on those claiming

You do understand this do you not?

The Devil, You Know wrote:

Didge wrote:


1) Do I? How is it rage by questioning such a really ridiculous point posed when as seen, they have clearly not seen other pictures?

2) I do nlove how you have become as bad as the left in how you think to make people believe what you say is how people are. Ho was I angry here, when taking the piss?

3) Is now taking the piss anger to you?

4) To me it is an exucse and as seen whym, because its based on one picture and not the many pictures of this event, which shows many people behind corbyn. Now I now you have some paranoid view also, where you simple cannot debate people and have to form views in order to downgrade them. Its only how you can debate, but lets have a reality check here

5) You have not taken into view the angles and any understanding of photogrpahy. You come out with some babble instead and neglect the view, that you now want to take the view of imbicillies, but this is your normal standing here

So on what aspect and I will ask you based on camera angles, lighting, distance here, does Tommy have a case?

Or is it you have not got a single clue and i have now sucked you into a hole?

Come on sunshine

Lets see what you really know, because i am looking forward to tearing you apart, being as most are right about you being the negative far right idiot that you are

you do seem a little triggered. Perhaps it is better I wait for you to sober up so you can reflect on your foolishness.

is that why you coput out of answering mate?

ha ha ha 

the simple thing diggery is that the picture in question has a pair of legs but no body. the people in front of the dwarf are around 5ft 9 or 10. which would mean the top of his head is probably under 5 feet as there is nothing above their shoulders. If in all those different angles you have unearthed in all your investigations you can find a very very tiny man, we'll assume it was a man as the legs seem to be in suit with black shoes, then please point him out. As to the rest of your nonsense, who really cares what an old drunk thinks of anyone.