So Hamas DID use hospitals and schools as shields!!!!

Only the deluded wouldn't accept this!!! Hamas are bastards!!!! http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... z3D8nKICfB

daily mail article....very trustworthy, they have no bias whatsoever right?

Sorry is this the same newspaper that people like YOU were believing when they were reporting against Malky ?

Only the deluded wouldn't accept this!!! Hamas are bastards!!!! http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... z3D8nKICfB

daily mail article....very trustworthy, they have no bias whatsoever right?

Sorry is this the same newspaper that people like YOU were believing when they were reporting against Malky ?

no, i believed it when malky apoligised for the texts himself actually.

and who are people like me exactly?

and does the term "hurray for blackshirts!" mean anything to you?

Only the deluded wouldn't accept this!!! Hamas are bastards!!!! http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... z3D8nKICfB

daily mail article....very trustworthy, they have no bias whatsoever right?

Sorry is this the same newspaper that people like YOU were believing when they were reporting against Malky ?

no, i believed it when malky apoligised for the texts himself actually.

and who are people like me exactly?

and does the term "hurray for blackshirts!" mean anything to you?

No you didn't, you beloved it the moment the complaint first become public

Only the deluded wouldn't accept this!!! Hamas are bastards!!!! http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... z3D8nKICfB

daily mail article....very trustworthy, they have no bias whatsoever right?

Sorry is this the same newspaper that people like YOU were believing when they were reporting against Malky ?

no, i believed it when malky apoligised for the texts himself actually.

and who are people like me exactly?

and does the term "hurray for blackshirts!" mean anything to you?

No you didn't, you beloved it the moment the complaint first become public

beloved it?

even if that word had been used in the right context i can tell you it was not a nice day, probably the 2nd blackest in the history of the club (1st being the rebrand), i didn't want it to be true, and if memory serves malky apoligised later that day.

anyway, pointless argument, you've used a completley bias source to back up your completley bias views. But i cant say im surprised that someone who has consistently defended racism on hear is getting his news from a paper that, more often than not, does the same thing.

tell me ad, how many times a week do u say its political correctness gone mad"?

and once again...who are people like me?

Sorry *believed*

People like you are selective in what newspapers they believe whenever their reports fall into your agenda at the time. It was funny the moment the Daiky Mail reported about Malky people believed the story straight away yet the very same papers would call the paper all sorts if they reported something they didn't like. f*cking hypocrites

Sorry *believed*

People like you are selective in what newspapers they believe whenever their reports fall into your agenda at the time. It was funny the moment the Daiky Mail reported about Malky people believed the story straight away yet the very same papers would call the paper all sorts if they reported something they didn't like. f*cking hypocrites

so people are hypocrites for being skeptical??

its obvious that daily mail have a source close to the city, given the amount of stories that have turne out to be on the mark, also they have a decent sports journalists working for them.

its also obvious that daily mail are anti islam and gear most of their stories about islam in a negative light. politically they, like most papers, have an agenda.

as a "political" man surely you realise the difference right?

Sorry *believed*

People like you are selective in what newspapers they believe whenever their reports fall into your agenda at the time. It was funny the moment the Daiky Mail reported about Malky people believed the story straight away yet the very same papers would call the paper all sorts if they reported something they didn't like. f*cking hypocrites

so people are hypocrites for being skeptical??

its obvious that daily mail have a source close to the city, given the amount of stories that have turne out to be on the mark, also they have a decent sports journalists working for them.

its also obvious that daily mail are anti islam and gear most of their stories about islam in a negative light. politically they, like most papers, have an agenda.

as a "political" man surely you realise the difference right?

Hypocrites for only accepting stories which suit their own agenda

Sorry *believed*

People like you are selective in what newspapers they believe whenever their reports fall into your agenda at the time. It was funny the moment the Daiky Mail reported about Malky people believed the story straight away yet the very same papers would call the paper all sorts if they reported something they didn't like. f*cking hypocrites

so people are hypocrites for being skeptical??

its obvious that daily mail have a source close to the city, given the amount of stories that have turne out to be on the mark, also they have a decent sports journalists working for them.

its also obvious that daily mail are anti islam and gear most of their stories about islam in a negative light. politically they, like most papers, have an agenda.

as a "political" man surely you realise the difference right?

Hypocrites for only accepting stories which suit their own agenda

or only accepting stories from a proven reliable source (mail sport)?

Sorry *believed*

People like you are selective in what newspapers they believe whenever their reports fall into your agenda at the time. It was funny the moment the Daiky Mail reported about Malky people believed the story straight away yet the very same papers would call the paper all sorts if they reported something they didn't like. f*cking hypocrites

so people are hypocrites for being skeptical??

its obvious that daily mail have a source close to the city, given the amount of stories that have turne out to be on the mark, also they have a decent sports journalists working for them.

its also obvious that daily mail are anti islam and gear most of their stories about islam in a negative light. politically they, like most papers, have an agenda.

as a "political" man surely you realise the difference right?

Hypocrites for only accepting stories which suit their own agenda

or only accepting stories from a proven reliable source (mail sport)?

So are you really saying that only their sport stories are correct then and everything else is rubbish ? Really ?

Sorry *believed*

People like you are selective in what newspapers they believe whenever their reports fall into your agenda at the time. It was funny the moment the Daiky Mail reported about Malky people believed the story straight away yet the very same papers would call the paper all sorts if they reported something they didn't like. f*cking hypocrites

so people are hypocrites for being skeptical??

its obvious that daily mail have a source close to the city, given the amount of stories that have turne out to be on the mark, also they have a decent sports journalists working for them.

its also obvious that daily mail are anti islam and gear most of their stories about islam in a negative light. politically they, like most papers, have an agenda.

as a "political" man surely you realise the difference right?

Hypocrites for only accepting stories which suit their own agenda

or only accepting stories from a proven reliable source (mail sport)?

So are you really saying that only their sport stories are correct then and everything else is rubbish ? Really ?

you know its exhausting when you infer things from what i say.

i read their stories with a degree of skeptesism as its clear that they have an agenda....y'know...like anyone else over the age of 14 who reads the paper.

DOES THAT MAKE SENSE NOW?