You've altered this as well as you alluded to his 'views'. You can that's not an issue but it does throw off my initial response to you and the subsequent challenge above. Maybe he hasn't said anything maybe he he is allied to a banned group but it doesn't help matters if you alter your posts without stating the edit.Tom Rowsell, the 'historian', is an interesting chappie. No credentials apart from membership in a couple of racist organisations, including one now banned in the UK. As Pacifica has noted, a lot of this Anglo-Saxon/pagan malarkey is code for some deeply unpleasant views.
More ad hominem. So ok, maybe I did slightly misread initial post but you did go on to allude to unpleasant views in the very same post which is still there which somewhat suggests you were referring to the video poster too. Were you?I didn't alter anything. You must have misread, as often.
Try taking some responsibility for your own failings instead of launching into paranoid rants. Self-pity isn't a good look.
Absolutely. This was my initial post below to her.I think he wants to know how you know that.
Then started the usual ad hominem on my mental state of being. It's annoying, I won't lie.What views and what are you refering to with Pax?
Do you ever have a day off from hunting down and attacking people's views?