Comments Thread For: Canelo Alvarez Might Be Finished Taking Tough Fights

[Sid-Knee]

Yes the bell going like 15 seconds early in the round Lerena had him in trouble and Dubois getting opportunity after opportunity to get out of trouble but Lerena wasn't afford the same opportunity, Foster was looking to wave it off at first chance.

It's not my first fight I told you I got someone else to fetch up a list so I don't know even know if they're all right (but the majority after a skim seem to be) she even went as far as to mention every promoter involved and the name involved the most was Matchroom unsurprisingly.

Don't really care about your opinion about Brits vs Hispanic people tbh you've shown throughout this conversation a clear and unwarranted disdain towards Hispanics.

It's beyond comprehension you're trying to argue against the ref ruining the AJ vs Parker fight.
The D riding of Brits is outrageous, you'll justify bad reffing just because he comes out with a British flag.

I'm not floundering about anything son, I said you brought up ethnicity in this thread I never said you've targeted anyone on this particular thread based on ethnicity.

But it could be argued based on your attitude towards Hispanics/Latinos you seeming hate of Canelo is based on the sole fact he is Hispanic/Latino.

And of of course you said "top pros" after i corrected you and said most people don't even make it to the top level as an amatuer let a lone pro.

"Fighters who come from countries where the age to start pro boxing is 18 don't get the chance to fight a load of trash cans for years the way Canelo did. They're competing with the best amateurs in the world. But if you're going to include Canelo's fights from the age of 15 to 18, rationally, you'd do the same for every other fighter too. It's very simple to understand. For people who aren't idiots, anyway."

This is the issue with your argument, you're constantly corrected/adding to your argument after I've pointed out the flaws to try and "win" like a female, I haven't changed mine.

It's nothing to do with being intellectually dishonest, it's your inability to frame your argument properly and constantly having to correct yourself because of said abysmal framing.

OK, you're either intentionally gaslighting now and trolling, or you really are unstable. Pick one.

With Dubois it was clear he went down for the 2nd and 3rd time due to doing something to his knee. He was buying time. The only shot that actually hurt him was the first shot. As for the bell going early, i think you need to watch it again. Yes, the bell did go early, but the count hadn't finished yet. There would have only been a couple of seconds left once the count had finished. Go and watch the fight again to refresh yourself. The bell therefore didn't save him regardless of an early bell.

The list is atrocious for many reasons. When you copy an idiots homework, guess what, your homework is going to be idiotic. I didn't do more because i thought you'd come back and claim i only focused on a handful. I was going to slap you with the worst of it. But seeing as you didn't, i'll still give you the worst....

The first Taylor/Persoon fight, the one where they said it was really bad, actually took place in the US. Guess what, neither are British.

Brubaker/Nurse took place in Australia, with the Brit in Nurse, being the one who was robbed. Go figure.

Murray/Rosado was not only a wide and clear win for Murray, but Rosado even said after the fight he accepted he lost. Just not as wide as the cards where. But guess what, he did lose that wide. I'll happily go over it with you. But it's clear you don't want to do that.

McDonnell/Solis took place in Monte Carlo. Not only that, but i had it a draw. I remember Solis pulling away in the first half with Jamie needing the other half just to draw if he didn't score any KD's. And guess what, he did win the second half. He clearly wins it. You could watch it and see for yourself if you want.

Murray/Martinez took place in Argentina. It was Murray who clearly won but got robbed. He even had a clear KD disallowed. Again, not only did this fight not take place in the UK, but it was in fact the Brit getting ripped off.

Brook/Jones 1 was a fight in which Brook won if i remember, 117/111 on my card. The reason to why people thought Brook may have lost, is due to having his nose broken around the 5th round and gassing out due to it. But the thing is, you don't automatically win rounds due to your opponent being tired. You do actually have to land more shots and control the round. But Jones didn't come close to doing so. He's clearly out-landed in pretty much all of them. Again, watch the fight yourself and see Jones miss with nearly everything he throws while Brook lands clean hard shots. He didn't come close to losing. But that's the problem when people are so clueless about fight scoring. The rules don't say anything about winning the round no matter what due to a tired opponent. That would be silly.

Helenius/Chisora took place in Finland. Again, Chisora dominated and was robbed. This robbery was the reason why Vitali gave Chisora the shot without being a mandatory. He watched the fight and saw he clearly won.

If you actually knew what you were talking about and had actually watched these fights, you would have been able to identify this stinking shltfestof a list. But no, you're clueless. I watched these fights live. I have most of them in my DVD collection.

So after claiming i was being intellectually dishonest, you can't find anything where i mention anything negative about ethnicity, even though you were sure of yourself? But your arrogance and pride still lets you go on like you were right because you can't admit you were wrong. The irony. For the record, i don't dislike Hispanics and Latino's. It's Mexicans i have a problem with. It's all the cheating and corruption they do. Then you have the most poisonous and deranged fanbase in all of sports where they go round justifying every robbery whilst claiming that they were robbed when they don't get the decision even though the Mexican was clearly beaten. They're delusional. Try Youtube comments and social media. They're crawling everywhere. I don't like cheats, cowards or corruption. It doesn't matter who it is. Pretty much every title they have is through cheating and corruption.

No, i corrected you on the "Most top pros" comment. You saw my list and doubled down on it. Go and read my comments if you like. You should have done so before making a fool out of yourself again. But hey, pride is a b1tch.

All this because i said it was irrational to claim Canelo had more fights even though he turned pro at 15 unlike most others. It wasn't even a dig. But you took it as such. A dig would be me saying Canelo is a fraud and always has been. His entire career is smoke and mirrors. I'd be only too happy to point out in great detail why. When you see the pattern, it all becomes very clear. Only a dishonest person would accept it. Whenever anyone has asked why i claim the things about that joke and i give them all the reasons, they NEVER reply back. The truth is just too blinding to defend it you see. So if i was having a dig, i'd be only too happy to be direct with it. And yes, they were tin cans. hell, he was fighting shot smaller fighters for years on HBO. His first world title was against a Welter who wasn't close to being a contender in his weight class. It should have been the two top ranked fighters at LM. Right from the start he's had the advantages. He's a joke. I can't take him seriously. He isn't a fighter. Fighters don't think like him. You'll know the difference between a real fighter and Canelo when you compare them.

I didn't change anything. It was clear what i was saying. You're the one who has been changing things. You just can't admit it because you're desperate to win. But not only did you not win, you made it worse for yourself by doubling down all the time. Re-read the thread. It's actually hilarious. But at least you're in the right place being on this forum.

[Boro]

OK, you're either intentionally gaslighting now and trolling, or you really are unstable. Pick one.

With Dubois it was clear he went down for the 2nd and 3rd time due to doing something to his knee. He was buying time. The only shot that actually hurt him was the first shot. As for the bell going early, i think you need to watch it again. Yes, the bell did go early, but the count hadn't finished yet. There would have only been a couple of seconds left once the count had finished. Go and watch the fight again to refresh yourself. The bell therefore didn't save him regardless of an early bell.

The list is atrocious for many reasons. When you copy an idiots homework, guess what, your homework is going to be idiotic. I didn't do more because i thought you'd come back and claim i only focused on a handful. I was going to slap you with the worst of it. But seeing as you didn't, i'll still give you the worst....

The first Taylor/Persoon fight, the one where they said it was really bad, actually took place in the US. Guess what, neither are British.

Brubaker/Nurse took place in Australia, with the Brit in Nurse, being the one who was robbed. Go figure.

Murray/Rosado was not only a wide and clear win for Murray, but Rosado even said after the fight he accepted he lost. Just not as wide as the cards where. But guess what, he did lose that wide. I'll happily go over it with you. But it's clear you don't want to do that.

McDonnell/Solis took place in Monte Carlo. Not only that, but i had it a draw. I remember Solis pulling away in the first half with Jamie needing the other half just to draw if he didn't score any KD's. And guess what, he did win the second half. He clearly wins it. You could watch it and see for yourself if you want.

Murray/Martinez took place in Argentina. It was Murray who clearly won but got robbed. He even had a clear KD disallowed. Again, not only did this fight not take place in the UK, but it was in fact the Brit getting ripped off.

Brook/Jones 1 was a fight in which Brook won if i remember, 117/111 on my card. The reason to why people thought Brook may have lost, is due to having his nose broken around the 5th round and gassing out due to it. But the thing is, you don't automatically win rounds due to your opponent being tired. You do actually have to land more shots and control the round. But Jones didn't come close to doing so. He's clearly out-landed in pretty much all of them. Again, watch the fight yourself and see Jones miss with nearly everything he throws while Brook lands clean hard shots. He didn't come close to losing. But that's the problem when people are so clueless about fight scoring. The rules don't say anything about winning the round no matter what due to a tired opponent. That would be silly.

Helenius/Chisora took place in Finland. Again, Chisora dominated and was robbed. This robbery was the reason why Vitali gave Chisora the shot without being a mandatory. He watched the fight and saw he clearly won.

If you actually knew what you were talking about and had actually watched these fights, you would have been able to identify this stinking shltfestof a list. But no, you're clueless. I watched these fights live. I have most of them in my DVD collection.

So after claiming i was being intellectually dishonest, you can't find anything where i mention anything negative about ethnicity, even though you were sure of yourself? But your arrogance and pride still lets you go on like you were right because you can't admit you were wrong. The irony. For the record, i don't dislike Hispanics and Latino's. It's Mexicans i have a problem with. It's all the cheating and corruption they do. Then you have the most poisonous and deranged fanbase in all of sports where they go round justifying every robbery whilst claiming that they were robbed when they don't get the decision even though the Mexican was clearly beaten. They're delusional. Try Youtube comments and social media. They're crawling everywhere. I don't like cheats, cowards or corruption. It doesn't matter who it is. Pretty much every title they have is through cheating and corruption.

No, i corrected you on the "Most top pros" comment. You saw my list and doubled down on it. Go and read my comments if you like. You should have done so before making a fool out of yourself again. But hey, pride is a b1tch.

All this because i said it was irrational to claim Canelo had more fights even though he turned pro at 15 unlike most others. It wasn't even a dig. But you took it as such. A dig would be me saying Canelo is a fraud and always has been. His entire career is smoke and mirrors. I'd be only too happy to point out in great detail why. When you see the pattern, it all becomes very clear. Only a dishonest person would accept it. Whenever anyone has asked why i claim the things about that joke and i give them all the reasons, they NEVER reply back. The truth is just too blinding to defend it you see. So if i was having a dig, i'd be only too happy to be direct with it. And yes, they were tin cans. hell, he was fighting shot smaller fighters for years on HBO. His first world title was against a Welter who wasn't close to being a contender in his weight class. It should have been the two top ranked fighters at LM. Right from the start he's had the advantages. He's a joke. I can't take him seriously. He isn't a fighter. Fighters don't think like him. You'll know the difference between a real fighter and Canelo when you compare them.

I didn't change anything. It was clear what i was saying. You're the one who has been changing things. You just can't admit it because you're desperate to win. But not only did you not win, you made it worse for yourself by doubling down all the time. Re-read the thread. It's actually hilarious. But at least you're in the right place being on this forum.

And what did I say I would focus on in said list despite me not getting it, terrible refs wasn't it? you inability to read isn't my problem.

I literally highlighted the problem refs and fights.

That's a you issue, I know she choose to pick anything she deemed a robbery involving "Brits" because apparently she didn't understand the assignment but I couldn't care less.

Every time you've mentioned "Mexicans" in this thread you're disparaging of them and depending on who you ask Mexican itself is an Ethnicity.

But either way Hispanic/Latinos seem to get unwarranted contempt from you.

You didn't correct my about "most pros" I corrected you.

I never even mentioned most pros or amateurs initially, my OP just said "He's 19 years into his pro career going into his 65th fight for this era he's an old man in the game..."

And you made the decision to tell me his PRO fights don't count and we need to count every fighters fights from 15 years old.

Because every amatuer is apparently fighting world level fighters.

I corrected you then you switched up and decided it's not most fighters but "most top pros".

I didn't take anything as a dig I just think you're arguing irrationally, everyone accepts he's pro from 15, he was fighting 10 rounders at 16, 12 rounders at 17 not 3x2min rounds.

He was paid for his fights not relying solely on sponsors to live like amateurs have do.

He was in 8oz gloves for his few fights and then 10oz so smaller gloves with no headguard.

You can call Canelo a fraud for all I care, it's about denying the REALITY of him being a pro and in turn the length of his career and number of fights to further justify your disdain of Mexicans/Latinos/Hispanics.

I aren't trying to win anything, as I said above it's about reality, reality doesn't change because you want it it to.

[W1LL]

Canelo is a good fighter but Joe Calzaghe would have stood him on his head at 168.

[Sid-Knee]

And what did I say I would focus on in said list despite me not getting it, terrible refs wasn't it? you inability to read isn't my problem.

I literally highlighted the problem refs and fights.

That's a you issue, I know she choose to pick anything she deemed a robbery involving "Brits" because apparently she didn't understand the assignment but I couldn't care less.

Every time you've mentioned "Mexicans" in this thread you're disparaging of them and depending on who you ask Mexican itself is an Ethnicity.

But either way Hispanic/Latinos seem to get unwarranted contempt from you.

You didn't correct my about "most pros" I corrected you.

I never even mentioned most pros or amateurs initially, my OP just said "He's 19 years into his pro career going into his 65th fight for this era he's an old man in the game..."

And you made the decision to tell me his PRO fights don't count and we need to count every fighters fights from 15 years old.

Because every amatuer is apparently fighting world level fighters.

I corrected you then you switched up and decided it's not most fighters but "most top pros".

I didn't take anything as a dig I just think you're arguing irrationally, everyone accepts he's pro from 15, he was fighting 10 rounders at 16, 12 rounders at 17 not 3x2min rounds.

He was paid for his fights not relying solely on sponsors to live like amateurs have do.

He was in 8oz gloves for his few fights and then 10oz so smaller gloves with no headguard.

You can call Canelo a fraud for all I care, it's about denying the REALITY of him being a pro and in turn the length of his career and number of fights to further justify your disdain of Mexicans/Latinos/Hispanics.

I aren't trying to win anything, as I said above it's about reality, reality doesn't change because you want it it to.

Right, i'm only going to focus on a few points to make sure you and I are very clear on who is in the wrong here...

Point out where you corrected me on the "Most pros" part? Give me the page and comment number? I asked you to do it in my last post. But not only have you not, you've gone ahead and continued with your your clear delusion. Actually point it out to me. Make it very clear. If you're correct, you'd have no problem doing so. You're still saying i made the claim of every amateur fighting the very best. No, i didn't. I said most top fighters in the pros today fought the best amateurs. But apparently, i said every amateur was fighting the very best the world of amateur boxing had to offer. You can't even make this up.

Why would you focus on what you believe to be refs bad decision making when we're actually talking about robberies from judges? I never mentioned refs. Just robberies. If i were to focus on refs too, i wouldn't have enough hours in the day listing it all. But for the record, you didn't mention anything about your list mostly containing bad decisions from refs until i pointed out your list being terrible. Therefore, i can read quite perfectly. But it's clear you want to hang onto the gaslighting angle. You've done it repeatedly now.

Mexico is a country. A Mexican is someone from that very country. It isn't an ethnicity. You said i mentioned ethnicity. Now that it's clear i never said anything about anyone's ethnicity as you can't point it out to me that i did, you're again doubling down to desperately win this silly argument by saying that i have something against Hispanics. Show me where i have anything to say about Hispanics on any topic that doesn't include Mexicans? I've told you why i have a problem with Mexicans.

You're still not getting it on the matter of Canelo having fights being the age of 15. Holy shlt, you've got serious problems. I didn't ask for Canelo's fights to be deducted from the age of 15 to 18 and that they don't count you absolute idiot. I just said that you'd have to include the fights from others from the age of 15 too to go alongside their pro fights to get a more reasonable view of how many fights they've had. How many times do you need to be told for you to get it? Please tell me you're trolling at this point. Because if you're not, you're a disturbed person. Do you know that.

Do not reply unless you can point out everything i've asked you to. Do not reply with deflection and more bollocks. Actually point it out to me.

[Boro]

Right, i'm only going to focus on a few points to make sure you and I are very clear on who is in the wrong here...

Point out where you corrected me on the "Most pros" part? Give me the page and comment number? I asked you to do it in my last post. But not only have you not, you've gone ahead and continued with your your clear delusion. Actually point it out to me. Make it very clear. If you're correct, you'd have no problem doing so. You're still saying i made the claim of every amateur fighting the very best. No, i didn't. I said most top fighters in the pros today fought the best amateurs. But apparently, i said every amateur was fighting the very best the world of amateur boxing had to offer. You can't even make this up.

Why would you focus on what you believe to be refs bad decision making when we're actually talking about robberies from judges? I never mentioned refs. Just robberies. If i were to focus on refs too, i wouldn't have enough hours in the day listing it all. But for the record, you didn't mention anything about your list mostly containing bad decisions from refs until i pointed out your list being terrible. Therefore, i can read quite perfectly. But it's clear you want to hang onto the gaslighting angle. You've done it repeatedly now.

Mexico is a country. A Mexican is someone from that very country. It isn't an ethnicity. You said i mentioned ethnicity. Now that it's clear i never said anything about anyone's ethnicity as you can't point it out to me that i did, you're again doubling down to desperately win this silly argument by saying that i have something against Hispanics. Show me where i have anything to say about Hispanics on any topic that doesn't include Mexicans? I've told you why i have a problem with Mexicans.

You're still not getting it on the matter of Canelo having fights being the age of 15. Holy shlt, you've got serious problems. I didn't ask for Canelo's fights to be deducted from the age of 15 to 18 and that they don't count you absolute idiot. I just said that you'd have to include the fights from others from the age of 15 too to go alongside their pro fights to get a more reasonable view of how many fights they've had. How many times do you need to be told for you to get it? Please tell me you're trolling at this point. Because if you're not, you're a disturbed person. Do you know that.

Do not reply unless you can point out everything i've asked you to. Do not reply with deflection and more bollocks. Actually point it out to me.

I didn't say they were amateur fights.I said you'd have to include every fight from the age of 15 for all fighters to go with their pro resume if you're including Canelo's fights during this time period.

Fighters who come from countries where the age to start pro boxing is 18 don't get the chance to fight a load of trash cans for years the way Canelo did. They're competing with the best amateurs in the world. But if you're going to include Canelo's fights from the age of 15 to 18, rationally, you'd do the same for every other fighter too. It's very simple to understand. For people who aren't idiots, anyway.

I respond numerous points but the main one you responded to was - Not all amateurs are competing at the top level of the domestic stage let alone world stage, so your claim about "fighting the best amateurs in the world" is dubious at best and completely ill informed/ignorant at worst. to which you respond -

You even think the absolute bums Canelo fought during that period are somehow better because they were over a longer distance than the very best amateurs in the world. To which most of the top fighters in the pro's did in fact fight.

When neither you or I mentioned "best amateurs" or "top fighters in the pros" you only made this point after I corrected you because you realised your position was untenable.

Why wouldn't I focus on bad refs, it's always the same refs on the same two promoters cards making shocking decisions if you don't think officiating can constitute robbing someone just think about the undisputed fight this past weekend and how people feel Usyk was robbed of a KO (not that I agree but hey-ho).

I said depending on who you ask Mexican is an ethnicity and all the residents are hispanic/latino so it's a cute attempt at trying to evade the responsibility for your out and out xenophobia and bigotry.

Again how disingenuous do you have to be to equate 10-12 round fights with no headguards, smaller gloves against grown men which he did go the distance in some at 17.

To 3x2 in headguards, I know you'll try the pathetic non argument about "top amateurs" again but you're talking about a fraction of a percent of pro fighters who are also top amateurs.

Most fighters are cans and don't have a good amateur record, didn't fight big names in said amateurs and never go on to be a "top pro" but you've already tried to argue against this so it's redundant to reiterate this point.

Proven by your own claims about Canelo fighting nothing but cans in his first few years as a pro ironically...

[Sid-Knee]

I respond numerous points but the main one you responded to was - Not all amateurs are competing at the top level of the domestic stage let alone world stage, so your claim about "fighting the best amateurs in the world" is dubious at best and completely ill informed/ignorant at worst. to which you respond -



When neither you or I mentioned "best amateurs" or "top fighters in the pros" you only made this point after I corrected you because you realised your position was untenable.

Why wouldn't I focus on bad refs, it's always the same refs on the same two promoters cards making shocking decisions if you don't think officiating can constitute robbing someone just think about the undisputed fight this past weekend and how people feel Usyk was robbed of a KO (not that I agree but hey-ho).

I said depending on who you ask Mexican is an ethnicity and all the residents are hispanic/latino so it's a cute attempt at trying to evade the responsibility for your out and out xenophobia and bigotry.

Again how disingenuous do you have to be to equate 10-12 round fights with no headguards, smaller gloves against grown men which he did go the distance in some at 17.

To 3x2 in headguards, I know you'll try the pathetic non argument about "top amateurs" again but you're talking about a fraction of a percent of pro fighters who are also top amateurs.

Most fighters are cans and don't have a good amateur record, didn't fight big names in said amateurs and never go on to be a "top pro" but you've already tried to argue against this so it's redundant to reiterate this point.

Proven by your own claims about Canelo fighting nothing but cans in his first few years as a pro ironically...

You think me saying "Fighters who come from countries where the age to start pro boxing is 18 don't get the chance to fight a load of trash cans for years" is me saying that Canelo should have his fights from the age of 15 to 18, docked? WTF are you even saying at this point. It doesn't even hint at it, you mad loon. It's explaining that fighters from other countries don't get the chance to fight from the age of 15 to put a load of fights on their pro record like Canelo and Mexicans do.

The comment you quoted me on clearly states that "Most top pro fighters" fight the best amateurs in the world. Yet you're saying that i said ALL pro fighters did and that you corrected me on it. No, i corrected you numerous times now. But it's clear you're an idiot of the absolute highest level. Red the whole comment you moron. It's right there. You know, the part where is says, "To which most of the top fighters in the pro's did in fact fight".

You accused me a couple of times about saying negative things about ethnicity. But when you found out that also wasn't true, you doubled down and tried to cast it off as me "Clearly not liking Hispanics". No, it's just Mexicans for obvious reasons. I didn't say anything about ethnicity you clown. Mexico is a country with numerous ethnicities. Forget depending on who you ask. If they say anything that is in agreement with you, then it's clear they're a f3cking idiot.

Have you looked and seen you didn't mention anything about refs until i told you your list was atrocious? But you were sure that you did. Have you ever thought that you're an idiot and need help by any chance?

Don't reply back to me. I've seen enough of your laughable insanity. Just have some decency to fold your account and at least come back under another name. Any normal person wouldn't be able to handle the shame by this point.

[Boro]

You think me saying "Fighters who come from countries where the age to start pro boxing is 18 don't get the chance to fight a load of trash cans for years" is me saying that Canelo should have his fights from the age of 15 to 18, docked? WTF are you even saying at this point. It doesn't even hint at it, you mad loon. It's explaining that fighters from other countries don't get the chance to fight from the age of 15 to put a load of fights on their pro record like Canelo and Mexicans do.

The comment you quoted me on clearly states that "Most top pro fighters" fight the best amateurs in the world. Yet you're saying that i said ALL pro fighters did and that you corrected me on it. No, i corrected you numerous times now. But it's clear you're an idiot of the absolute highest level. Red the whole comment you moron. It's right there. You know, the part where is says, "To which most of the top fighters in the pro's did in fact fight".

You accused me a couple of times about saying negative things about ethnicity. But when you found out that also wasn't true, you doubled down and tried to cast it off as me "Clearly not liking Hispanics". No, it's just Mexicans for obvious reasons. I didn't say anything about ethnicity you clown. Mexico is a country with numerous ethnicities. Forget depending on who you ask. If they say anything that is in agreement with you, then it's clear they're a f3cking idiot.

Have you looked and seen you didn't mention anything about refs until i told you your list was atrocious? But you were sure that you did. Have you ever thought that you're an idiot and need help by any chance?

Don't reply back to me. I've seen enough of your laughable insanity. Just have some decency to fold your account and at least come back under another name. Any normal person wouldn't be able to handle the shame by this point.

Where did i mention "docked" fights you ret@rd, you're just reading things into a conversation that aren't there to be read.

Yes the quote AFTER your original quote that's my point, like I said after you realised your point was untenable...

Mexico is majority Hispanic, you can skirt around the ethnicity issue like I said but the point will remain regardless, it's funny calling me an idiot when you can't grasp this basic concept .

Also it started with me calling you Xenophobic which is more than apparent not ethnophobic you're just got stuck on it because you think you can get a win but you can't.

"I came up with an obvious example that came straight to my head you ret@rd, I'm not wasting my time thinking about a load of fights were people have been jobbed but if you want robberies/dodgy stoppages i'll get someone to look it up and find the common refs across the board." - literally on the post of the list, so you were saying!?

It's hilarious that's you'd have the audacity to mention anything being laughable, when i've literally proven every single one of your statements to be fallacious or just straight up lies.

And yet you continue to respond and use ad hominems as if that's going to strengthen your position.

But i've been done with this conversation you're the British equivalent to the LDBC, racist, clueless and support fighters based on nationality/race and cry on about others doing it and you seemingly don't even realise your own hypocrisy whilst doing so or you do and you're just that willfully ignorant