"We all know that Russia has been responsible, the puppet master, for pretty much every problem that the west has had over the past 10 years".
Reductio ad absurdum fallacy. This fallacy occurs when someone tries to prove an argument false by misapplying the premises or making false and absurd conclusions from the argument.
That you think I am "testimony to the efficacy of brainwashing and propaganda" is what your propagandists have brainwashed you into believing.
\\That you think I am "testimony to the efficacy of brainwashing and propaganda" is what your propagandists have brainwashed you into believing.
And how that propaganda could target you SO precisely?
Maybe you can give me a link where... Rep-propaganda (through rep music? 8-))) said it to FJ "once upon a time certain Derpy will come to your blog -- go call im brainwashed"? ;-P
Or... how do you think that propaganda did it???
\\Reductio ad absurdum fallacy. This fallacy occurs when someone tries to prove an argument false by misapplying the premises or making false and absurd conclusions from the argument.
Well... you showed just another time -- how little youundertand of that "smart" things you trying to cite. ;-P
Qtard: once upon a time certain Derpy will come to your blog -- go call im brainwashed.
Reductio ad absurdum fallacy. You're trying to use it against me right after I point out Glenn Greenwald used it in the video Minus linked to? Proof of how stupid you are -- you read the description and said to yourself, "that's a good idea, I think I will do the same thing".
Minus would call anyone "brainwashed" who countered his false "djt was framed" BS. Not only specifically me.
Qtard: you showed just another time -- how little youundertand of that "smart" things you trying to cite.
(1) I didn't "try" to cite, I actually cited. (2) This "another time" only occurred in a delusion you had, not in reality.
Qtard: \\Minus would call anyone "brainwashed" who countered his false "djt was framed" BS.\\ Go demonstrate how that claim is wrong... and I would listen to it.
Dodge. Again. You ignore the reason I gave that answer. You idiotically claimed I was saying that propaganda Minus received told him "once upon a time certain Derpy will come to your blog -- go call im brainwashed".
You said "can give me a link where... Rep-propaganda ... said it". But I NEVER claimed his propagandists said anything about me specifically. Just about people like me who reject the false narrative wherein HRC "frames" donald tRump.
I ACCURATELY pointed out that you were employing the Reductio ad absurdum fallacy. After I JUST brought it up. fyi, Reductio ad absurdum fallacy copied and pasted from Google. With FULL understanding of meaning. Contrary to your BS lies about me copying and pasting without understanding.
Qtard: For now -- there is evidnaces that work in favor that he is right (like, dRump STILL not convicted), and NO evidances that back YOUR claims.
There are SOLID "evidances" that prove donald tRump concluded with Russia. Why the bipartisan Senate Intelligence concluded (in a lengthy report) that HE DID. Meanwhile, there are scant "evidances" that HRC, Obama and Biden colluded to "frame" donald tRump. Only a report by Durham. Issued after he concluded his "investigation" withOUT charging HRC, Obama or Biden. And with 2 of the three people he did charge being exonerated. Because the Durham report is a JOKE.
Qtard: All is THIS simple.
AGREED. Yet you still don't understand.
Qtard: And you'd understand that... if you'd not be this hopeless u.u.r.b.
I have never discussed religion. I am not "religious bonker". Proven by your complete lack of any quotes or citations proving I am "religious bonker". Except for your bogus claim that "I believe in facts" is religious bonkerism. When IT IS NOT. Because my belief is evidence-based, not faith-based.
Qtard: HE -- able to provide some evidnaces that could stirr some doubts.
Minus didn't provide any "evidnaces", only spin and propaganda. Your doubts are stirred because you want to BELIEVE the rightturd spin and propaganda. While you do not want to believe that donald tRump colluded with Russia. Despite the proof that he did.
Qtard: YOU -- not.
Me, YES.
Qtard: Because, YOUR "evidances", "claims", "facts" DO NOT coroborate with Reality.
My "evidances" CONFIRM the tRump campaign colluded with Russia. Corroboration with reality? Check...
Quote: In an explosive development, the Biden administration confirmed that a Russian government agent with close connections to Donald Trump’s top 2016 campaign official "provided the Russian Intelligence Services with sensitive information on polling and [Trump] campaign strategy". This revelation demolishes, once and for all, Trump's ceaseless claims that he was the victim of the “greatest witch hunt in the history of our country".
Qtard: you showed just another time -- how little youundertand of that "smart" things you trying to cite. \\I didn't "try" to cite, I actually cited.\\ Try to read quotes you citing, before commenting em, would ya???
YOU wrote that I "tried to cite". I actually cited. There was no "try". As for the "how little youundertand" accusation, it is categorically false. If I didn't understand it I would NOT cite it. Also, you NEVER explained when this alleged "just another time" occurred. Or what citation I gave without understanding it. Vital facts that would bolster your accusation. But you FAILED to provide them. I wonder why. Maybe because your "how little you understand" was complete BS?
Qtard: And there was NOTHING like your claim that I accused you in "not citing".
There was. YOU wrote that I "tried to cite".
Qtard: That was accusation. No, just a mere observation -- that you do not *understand* what you citing.
FALSE accusation. Nonexistent "observation". Like if I said I observed you raping many men.
Qtard: Yoiu can back this claim with some truthful expalanation -- why that is so, as you say???
Yes. Your refusal to explain when this "another time" happened or what it was in regards to. You provided ZERO evidence to support your bogus claim.
Qtard: Naah...
AGREED! You will not ever explain anything about this "another time". Because there was no "another time".
But he... he is AN expert. How dare you to not believe to "somebody-somebody who saying someting-something"????!!! ;-P
\\Except for your bogus claim that "I believe in facts" is religious bonkerism. When IT IS NOT. Because my belief is evidence-based, not faith-based.
But... "eviances" based on beliefs. ;-P
Circular reasoning -- YET ONE trait of Religious Bonker. Confirmed!
\\AGREED. Yet you still don't understand.
Yet... you still unable to state properly (and with quotes) -- what exactly I do not understnand.
Yawn. :-))))))))))))))))
\\Minus didn't provide any "evidnaces", only spin and propaganda. Your doubts are stirred because you want to BELIEVE the rightturd spin and propaganda. While you do not want to believe that donald tRump colluded with Russia. Despite the proof that he did.
:-)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
Spewage brimming of self-contradicting... only True Idiot can do. ;-P
\\My "evidances" CONFIRM the tRump campaign colluded with Russia. Corroboration with reality? Check...
\\Quote: In an explosive development, the Biden administration confirmed that a Russian government agent with close connections to Donald Trump’s top 2016 campaign official "provided the Russian Intelligence Services with sensitive information on polling and [Trump] campaign strategy". This revelation...
Revelation? :-)))))))))))))))))))))))
That is like that "God told Moses" Revelation???
Which nobody saw and cannot be confirmed with ANY facts.
Just from the words of phariseis "believe us... we know what we saying".
And you even trying to say that you are NOT Religiuous Bonker... while you demonstrating how hot you believing in such "reveleations". :-)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))0
\\ If I didn't understand it I would NOT cite it.
Why should I believe you?
You citing my words all of the time (correct and useful practice you learned from me, but... yeah).
And 99% of it shows only your lack of understanding.
And 1% -- your DELIVERATE tryes to subvert and twist my words.
\\Vital facts that would bolster your accusation. But you FAILED to provide them. I wonder why. Maybe because your "how little you understand" was complete BS?
cite to me definition of word -- FACT. Can you?
Naah.
This way... this your claim destroed from the very beginning.
What "vital facts" you can demand of me... if you NOT capable to understand what facts IS... and what they NOT??? :-))))))))))
\\There was. YOU wrote that I "tried to cite".
Can you demonstrate logic?
Naah.
\\FALSE accusation. Nonexistent "observation". Like if I said I observed you raping many men.
My... confirmed with quotes. ;-P
Yours... is just a demonstration of wirlwinds in your mine (or, maybe, some hiden desire to be raped... by man... who knows) :-))))))))))))))))))))
\\Yes. Your refusal to explain when this "another time" happened or what it was in regards to. You provided ZERO evidence to support your bogus claim.
Your words was
\\\\(2) This "another time" only occurred in a delusion you had, not in reality.
And who is more bogus here??? Rethorical question.
My words based on CORRECT!!! quotes and sound logic.
Yours... on "you had a delusion". :-))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
Easy to see who are cranky pot here. ;-P
\\AGREED! You will not ever explain anything about this "another time". Because there was no "another time".
Yawn.
As I said... you do not understand EVEN your own writing.
See... just ABOVE... in CORRECT quotes of YOUR word -- you claimed that that "another time" happened in a delusion.
HOW I can explain you about you delusions... if you do not want to lay on a sofa and tell me about your childish emotions???? :-))))))))))
10 comments:
Lies and spin from a trump and Putin loving fake Lefty. I mean Greenwald btw, not Dan Goldman.
You're living testimony to the efficacy of brainwashing and propaganda.
:P
"We all know that Russia has been responsible, the puppet master, for pretty much every problem that the west has had over the past 10 years".
Reductio ad absurdum fallacy. This fallacy occurs when someone tries to prove an argument false by misapplying the premises or making false and absurd conclusions from the argument.
That you think I am "testimony to the efficacy of brainwashing and propaganda" is what your propagandists have brainwashed you into believing.
\\That you think I am "testimony to the efficacy of brainwashing and propaganda" is what your propagandists have brainwashed you into believing.
And how that propaganda could target you SO precisely?
Maybe you can give me a link where... Rep-propaganda (through rep music? 8-))) said it to FJ "once upon a time certain Derpy will come to your blog -- go call im brainwashed"? ;-P
Or... how do you think that propaganda did it???
\\Reductio ad absurdum fallacy. This fallacy occurs when someone tries to prove an argument false by misapplying the premises or making false and absurd conclusions from the argument.
Well... you showed just another time -- how little youundertand of that "smart" things you trying to cite. ;-P
Qtard: once upon a time certain Derpy will come to your blog -- go call im brainwashed.
Reductio ad absurdum fallacy. You're trying to use it against me right after I point out Glenn Greenwald used it in the video Minus linked to? Proof of how stupid you are -- you read the description and said to yourself, "that's a good idea, I think I will do the same thing".
Minus would call anyone "brainwashed" who countered his false "djt was framed" BS. Not only specifically me.
Qtard: you showed just another time -- how little youundertand of that "smart" things you trying to cite.
(1) I didn't "try" to cite, I actually cited. (2) This "another time" only occurred in a delusion you had, not in reality.
\\Minus would call anyone "brainwashed" who countered his false "djt was framed" BS.
Go demonstrate how that claim is wrong... and I would listen to it.
For now -- there is evidnaces that work in favor that he is right (like, dRump STILL not convicted), and NO evidances that back YOUR claims.
All is THIS simple.
And you'd understand that... if you'd not be this hopeless u.u.r.b. :-)))))))))))))))))
For short.
HE -- able to provide some evidances that could stirr some doubts.
YOU -- not.
Because, YOUR "evidances", "claims", "facts" DO NOT coroborate with Reality. ;-P
\\Qtard: you showed just another time -- how little youundertand of that "smart" things you trying to cite.
\\(1) I didn't "try" to cite, I actually cited.
Try to read quotes you citing, before commenting em, would ya???
See.
I gave CORRECT quote. AND my words. AND your. In correct context.
And there was NOTHING like your claim that I accused you in "not citing".
That was accusation. No, just a mere observation -- that you do not *understand* what you citing. ;-P
\\(2) This "another time" only occurred in a delusion you had, not in reality.
And???
Yoiu can back this claim with some truthful expalanation -- why that is so, as you say???
Naah...
Qtard: \\Minus would call anyone "brainwashed" who countered his false "djt was framed" BS.\\ Go demonstrate how that claim is wrong... and I would listen to it.
Dodge. Again. You ignore the reason I gave that answer. You idiotically claimed I was saying that propaganda Minus received told him "once upon a time certain Derpy will come to your blog -- go call im brainwashed".
You said "can give me a link where... Rep-propaganda ... said it". But I NEVER claimed his propagandists said anything about me specifically. Just about people like me who reject the false narrative wherein HRC "frames" donald tRump.
I ACCURATELY pointed out that you were employing the Reductio ad absurdum fallacy. After I JUST brought it up. fyi, Reductio ad absurdum fallacy copied and pasted from Google. With FULL understanding of meaning. Contrary to your BS lies about me copying and pasting without understanding.
Qtard: For now -- there is evidnaces that work in favor that he is right (like, dRump STILL not convicted), and NO evidances that back YOUR claims.
There are SOLID "evidances" that prove donald tRump concluded with Russia. Why the bipartisan Senate Intelligence concluded (in a lengthy report) that HE DID. Meanwhile, there are scant "evidances" that HRC, Obama and Biden colluded to "frame" donald tRump. Only a report by Durham. Issued after he concluded his "investigation" withOUT charging HRC, Obama or Biden. And with 2 of the three people he did charge being exonerated. Because the Durham report is a JOKE.
Qtard: All is THIS simple.
AGREED. Yet you still don't understand.
Qtard: And you'd understand that... if you'd not be this hopeless u.u.r.b.
I have never discussed religion. I am not "religious bonker". Proven by your complete lack of any quotes or citations proving I am "religious bonker". Except for your bogus claim that "I believe in facts" is religious bonkerism. When IT IS NOT. Because my belief is evidence-based, not faith-based.
Qtard: HE -- able to provide some evidnaces that could stirr some doubts.
Minus didn't provide any "evidnaces", only spin and propaganda. Your doubts are stirred because you want to BELIEVE the rightturd spin and propaganda. While you do not want to believe that donald tRump colluded with Russia. Despite the proof that he did.
Qtard: YOU -- not.
Me, YES.
Qtard: Because, YOUR "evidances", "claims", "facts" DO NOT coroborate with Reality.
My "evidances" CONFIRM the tRump campaign colluded with Russia. Corroboration with reality? Check...
Quote: In an explosive development, the Biden administration confirmed that a Russian government agent with close connections to Donald Trump’s top 2016 campaign official "provided the Russian Intelligence Services with sensitive information on polling and [Trump] campaign strategy". This revelation demolishes, once and for all, Trump's ceaseless claims that he was the victim of the “greatest witch hunt in the history of our country".
Qtard: you showed just another time -- how little youundertand of that "smart" things you trying to cite. \\I didn't "try" to cite, I actually cited.\\ Try to read quotes you citing, before commenting em, would ya???
YOU wrote that I "tried to cite". I actually cited. There was no "try". As for the "how little youundertand" accusation, it is categorically false. If I didn't understand it I would NOT cite it. Also, you NEVER explained when this alleged "just another time" occurred. Or what citation I gave without understanding it. Vital facts that would bolster your accusation. But you FAILED to provide them. I wonder why. Maybe because your "how little you understand" was complete BS?
Qtard: And there was NOTHING like your claim that I accused you in "not citing".
There was. YOU wrote that I "tried to cite".
Qtard: That was accusation. No, just a mere observation -- that you do not *understand* what you citing.
FALSE accusation. Nonexistent "observation". Like if I said I observed you raping many men.
Qtard: Yoiu can back this claim with some truthful expalanation -- why that is so, as you say???
Yes. Your refusal to explain when this "another time" happened or what it was in regards to. You provided ZERO evidence to support your bogus claim.
Qtard: Naah...
AGREED! You will not ever explain anything about this "another time". Because there was no "another time".
\\Because the Durham report is a JOKE.
:-))))))))))))))))
But he... he is AN expert. How dare you to not believe to "somebody-somebody who saying someting-something"????!!! ;-P
\\Except for your bogus claim that "I believe in facts" is religious bonkerism. When IT IS NOT. Because my belief is evidence-based, not faith-based.
But... "eviances" based on beliefs. ;-P
Circular reasoning -- YET ONE trait of Religious Bonker. Confirmed!
\\AGREED. Yet you still don't understand.
Yet... you still unable to state properly (and with quotes) -- what exactly I do not understnand.
Yawn. :-))))))))))))))))
\\Minus didn't provide any "evidnaces", only spin and propaganda. Your doubts are stirred because you want to BELIEVE the rightturd spin and propaganda. While you do not want to believe that donald tRump colluded with Russia. Despite the proof that he did.
:-)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
Spewage brimming of self-contradicting... only True Idiot can do. ;-P
\\My "evidances" CONFIRM the tRump campaign colluded with Russia. Corroboration with reality? Check...
\\Quote: In an explosive development, the Biden administration confirmed that a Russian government agent with close connections to Donald Trump’s top 2016 campaign official "provided the Russian Intelligence Services with sensitive information on polling and [Trump] campaign strategy". This revelation...
Revelation? :-)))))))))))))))))))))))
That is like that "God told Moses" Revelation???
Which nobody saw and cannot be confirmed with ANY facts.
Just from the words of phariseis "believe us... we know what we saying".
And you even trying to say that you are NOT Religiuous Bonker... while you demonstrating how hot you believing in such "reveleations". :-)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))0
\\ If I didn't understand it I would NOT cite it.
Why should I believe you?
You citing my words all of the time (correct and useful practice you learned from me, but... yeah).
And 99% of it shows only your lack of understanding.
And 1% -- your DELIVERATE tryes to subvert and twist my words.
\\Vital facts that would bolster your accusation. But you FAILED to provide them. I wonder why. Maybe because your "how little you understand" was complete BS?
cite to me definition of word -- FACT. Can you?
Naah.
This way... this your claim destroed from the very beginning.
What "vital facts" you can demand of me... if you NOT capable to understand what facts IS... and what they NOT??? :-))))))))))
\\There was. YOU wrote that I "tried to cite".
Can you demonstrate logic?
Naah.
\\FALSE accusation. Nonexistent "observation". Like if I said I observed you raping many men.
My... confirmed with quotes. ;-P
Yours... is just a demonstration of wirlwinds in your mine (or, maybe, some hiden desire to be raped... by man... who knows) :-))))))))))))))))))))
\\Yes. Your refusal to explain when this "another time" happened or what it was in regards to. You provided ZERO evidence to support your bogus claim.
Your words was
\\\\(2) This "another time" only occurred in a delusion you had, not in reality.
And who is more bogus here??? Rethorical question.
My words based on CORRECT!!! quotes and sound logic.
Yours... on "you had a delusion". :-))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
Easy to see who are cranky pot here. ;-P
\\AGREED! You will not ever explain anything about this "another time". Because there was no "another time".
Yawn.
As I said... you do not understand EVEN your own writing.
See... just ABOVE... in CORRECT quotes of YOUR word -- you claimed that that "another time" happened in a delusion.
HOW I can explain you about you delusions... if you do not want to lay on a sofa and tell me about your childish emotions???? :-))))))))))
Post a Comment