Why you are so hell-bent on defending a theocratic regime that has produced such a "democratic" process that they disqualified a huge percentage of reform candidates before ever having their "elections." (another term for telling them to, "go **** yourselves... you ain't running for office, 'cause we don't want you to") You keep comparing the regime to that of the Shah's. Get a clue! Except for one or two members here with good, personal reasons to look back in fondness at the Shah's regime, none of the rest of us miss him and his grandiose pretentions to royalty one bit. The Shah is dead, his regime over. Iran is in the grip of a theocracy that has repressed the Iranian reform movement, imposed their religious rule on the country for years, are determined to aquire atomic weapons, have had their president dismiss the Holocaust as an exaggeration, called for the destruction of Israel, and other things too numerous to mention. I'm curious... Creepy, why do you have such a love for the theocratic regime of Iran? Why does it turn you on? Why does criticism of it twist your gonads in a knot? Keep D&D Civil.
CreepyFloyd must be paid per post by the Iranian ministry of information. There is no other explanation for his persistency in arguing in such a disingenuous fashion.
I've never actually put anyone on the 'ignore list,' but I think the best thing to do in response to one who takes a position and then refuses to defend it, then says its unrefuted - is to ignore him. He'll go away eventually. I have to say that I did glynch an injustice when I compared them. At least glynch will take a position and defend it to the best of his ability. You have to respect that. This guy....well - he's not worth a post.
i love how you keep on responding to me though....you're a hypocrite and i really love that fake photo you posted in the immigration thread to try and prove a point....haha
I put mr Crappy floyd on ignore. he fabricates stuff likes it's in fashion. everyone here can see through his absurd lies.
Well it's not that he doesn't have warrants. It's just that he's more persistant than most. Generally we'll have a discussion but no one has to repeat stuff over and over again but lately conversations involving creepyfloyd have started to embrace that trend. There's nothing wrong with him or what he says. He generally provides some level of warrants. It's just that threads involving him get old and very little new substantive discussion occurs since it just becomes a cyclical discussion. Also, the name calling that occurs on his part gets a little annoying.
on my part? if i've ever done any name calling it has been in response to name calling directed towards me also, when name calling has been directed towards me on the part of people like hayes and blazer ben (just look at his last post for example where calls me crappy), i've resisted the temptation to stoop to their lever all you have to do to see this is to examine the threads again, i'm only interested in the facts
Mr Creepyfloyd, if i called you any names i am sorry. lets just agree to disagree on this issue. shah was a loser and the mollahs are the same. lets hope for a day where we have a secular system where our countrymen and woman can leave in peace. i've not disliked here, so lets keep it that way?.... i might have got hysterical and steped over the redline. if i did, accept my sincer apologies.
i thought you put me on your ignore list? we can definitely agree to disagree, but i think we all should be open to new ideas and different perspectives without getting upset i harbor no ill-will towards anyone take care
I disagree. There is a disconnect between his claims and his warrants (if there are any). He has no intention, apparently, of taking any burden of rejoinder. Instead he backslides on any claim he clearly can't win and just repeats his intial premise. Its not suprising his conversations involve circles. I, for one, will no longer be wasting time responding to him.
