You are right and maybe the new movie coming out is just an indoctrination attempt to get us ready for the final phase of the invasion!
Get Mulder and Skully on the case!
You are right and maybe the new movie coming out is just an indoctrination attempt to get us ready for the final phase of the invasion!
Get Mulder and Skully on the case!
You people just don't get it. If the documents were fake, why would the Brits call them accurate? Why wouldn't Blair denounce them as fakes?
In the political condition Blair is in, I'm sure he wouldn't stand by and allow more damage to be done if it wasn't all true.
Don't you all agree?
In the political condition Blair is in, I'm sure he wouldn't stand by and allow more damage to be done if it wasn't all true.
Don't you all agree?
Because if they spent all day dealing with crackpots nothing would get done. These things are so far from credible they probably assume most people will simply disregard them.
In your twisted world not responding means it must be true.
Sometimes not responding is because it isnt even worth responding to.
Hand typed renditions of destroyed photo-copies.
What a joke some people are so desperate they will latch onto something like this.
Let's see how long it takes for the apologists to disregard the article because of the first sentence: "The Liberal Democrat leader, Charles Kennedy".
Even if it is a british politician and has nothing to do with neither US Liberals, US Democrats or the Kennedy's.
They already accepted the accuracy of the documents. Don't you get it?
And I'M in a twisted world. :roll: Bwahaha.
Never underestimate the power of denial.
Point is it wasnt yesterday.
Something tells me the memos listed in his article are not the same memos that were supposedly printed by the Sunday Times on May 1st 2005
The downing street memo is dated July 23rd 2002 while his article makes mention of meetings between condi and blair in March of 2002. We are talking about a 4 month difference.
Originally posted by: AnyMal
Originally posted by: totalcommand
Learn to read: "you and the other guy are asking for the originals only because you know they do not exist. this is a great tactic, but is the definition of disingenuous."
You opened this thread to take a crap on the whole issue. The premise of this thread is B.S. At least CsG makes arguments to back up his statements, but you just keep spewing from your bowels. As CsG eloquently puts it, here's something to refuel yourself:
If you don't like me confronting you on your B.S., leave your thread.
The premise of this thread is a valid question: "do these memos exist?" I realize the you prefer bullsh1t over truth since it fits your agenda the best. Just like anything you libs do, half-truths and outright lies are OK as long as they serve their purpose. Nice trolling, but I don't buy your BS.
You're right, the premise of your thread is a valid question: "am I a tool?" Let me answer it for you. Yes, you are a tool.
You know the original memos have been destroyed, and that's why you're asking them.
I haven't seen the original copy of the Bible. I guess Jesus's word is all a lie.
Bond, you'd have to be living in this place called "reality" to agree.
The cons in this thread are too busy jacking off to each other to come back to reality.
Originally posted by: totalcommand
Originally posted by: AnyMal
Originally posted by: totalcommand
Learn to read: "you and the other guy are asking for the originals only because you know they do not exist. this is a great tactic, but is the definition of disingenuous."
You opened this thread to take a crap on the whole issue. The premise of this thread is B.S. At least CsG makes arguments to back up his statements, but you just keep spewing from your bowels. As CsG eloquently puts it, here's something to refuel yourself:
If you don't like me confronting you on your B.S., leave your thread.
The premise of this thread is a valid question: "do these memos exist?" I realize the you prefer bullsh1t over truth since it fits your agenda the best. Just like anything you libs do, half-truths and outright lies are OK as long as they serve their purpose. Nice trolling, but I don't buy your BS.
You're right, the premise of your thread is a valid question: "am I a tool?" Let me answer it for you. Yes, you are a tool.
You know the original memos have been destroyed, and that's why you're asking them.
I haven't seen the original copy of the Bible. I guess Jesus's word is all a lie.
THE ORIGINALS HAVE NOT BEEN DESTROYED!
shira
Diamond Member
- Jan 12, 2005
- 9,500
- 6
- 81
And just what would constitute proof?
If someone produced a photocopy of a signed memo, you could argue that it's a forgery. You would then say, "Where's the proof that this isn't a forgery. The burden of proof is on the accuser."
And if a documents expert examined the photocopy and asserted that in his opinion it wasn't a forgery, you'd argue "Who is this "expert". Does he have an agenda? Where's the proof he's being impartial?"
This never ends. It sounds like the "proof" you demand is that some high British official stands in front of a podium and says, "The Downing Street memos are genuine." Short of that, no proof anyone produces will satisfy you.
Which begs the question:
Are you consistent in this level of a demand for proof? Do YOU ever make any arguments using information for which there isn't iron-clad proof? Do you ever make claims or statements about economic policy, political decisions, or social policy that are based on less than iron-clad proof?
This goes for CSG, too: If this absurd "proof" argument is how you want to play the game, then we can all assume that in the future you will provide irrefutable, solid "proof" before you make any statements, any opinions, any innuendos on these forums.
Is that a promise from you and CSG?
Originally posted by: Darkhawk28
Originally posted by: totalcommand
Originally posted by: AnyMal
Originally posted by: totalcommand
Learn to read: "you and the other guy are asking for the originals only because you know they do not exist. this is a great tactic, but is the definition of disingenuous."
You opened this thread to take a crap on the whole issue. The premise of this thread is B.S. At least CsG makes arguments to back up his statements, but you just keep spewing from your bowels. As CsG eloquently puts it, here's something to refuel yourself:
If you don't like me confronting you on your B.S., leave your thread.
The premise of this thread is a valid question: "do these memos exist?" I realize the you prefer bullsh1t over truth since it fits your agenda the best. Just like anything you libs do, half-truths and outright lies are OK as long as they serve their purpose. Nice trolling, but I don't buy your BS.
You're right, the premise of your thread is a valid question: "am I a tool?" Let me answer it for you. Yes, you are a tool.
You know the original memos have been destroyed, and that's why you're asking them.
I haven't seen the original copy of the Bible. I guess Jesus's word is all a lie.
THE ORIGINALS HAVE NOT BEEN DESTROYED!
THE REPORTER, WHO IS THE ONLY PERSON WHO HAD ACCESS TO PHOTOCOPIES OF THE ORIGINALS, DESTROYED THEM.
YOU WILL NEVER SEE THE ORIGINALS, OR A PHOTOCOPY OF THEM SINCE THEY ARE CONFIDENTIAL.
THAT IS WHY THESE CONS ARE ASKING FOR THEM, BECAUSE THEY KNOW NO ONE CAN OBTAIN THEM.
Originally posted by: totalcommand
Originally posted by: Darkhawk28
Originally posted by: totalcommand
Originally posted by: AnyMal
Originally posted by: totalcommand
Learn to read: "you and the other guy are asking for the originals only because you know they do not exist. this is a great tactic, but is the definition of disingenuous."
You opened this thread to take a crap on the whole issue. The premise of this thread is B.S. At least CsG makes arguments to back up his statements, but you just keep spewing from your bowels. As CsG eloquently puts it, here's something to refuel yourself:
If you don't like me confronting you on your B.S., leave your thread.
The premise of this thread is a valid question: "do these memos exist?" I realize the you prefer bullsh1t over truth since it fits your agenda the best. Just like anything you libs do, half-truths and outright lies are OK as long as they serve their purpose. Nice trolling, but I don't buy your BS.
You're right, the premise of your thread is a valid question: "am I a tool?" Let me answer it for you. Yes, you are a tool.
You know the original memos have been destroyed, and that's why you're asking them.
I haven't seen the original copy of the Bible. I guess Jesus's word is all a lie.
THE ORIGINALS HAVE NOT BEEN DESTROYED!
THE REPORTER, WHO IS THE ONLY PERSON WHO HAD ACCESS TO PHOTOCOPIES OF THE ORIGINALS, DESTROYED THEM.
YOU WILL NEVER SEE THE ORIGINALS, OR A PHOTOCOPY OF THEM SINCE THEY ARE CONFIDENTIAL.
THAT IS WHY THESE CONS ARE ASKING FOR THEM, BECAUSE THEY KNOW NO ONE CAN OBTAIN THEM.
Then please state that the photocopies have been destroyed, not the originals.
Originally posted by: Darkhawk28
Originally posted by: totalcommand
Originally posted by: Darkhawk28
Originally posted by: totalcommand
Originally posted by: AnyMal
Originally posted by: totalcommand
Learn to read: "you and the other guy are asking for the originals only because you know they do not exist. this is a great tactic, but is the definition of disingenuous."
You opened this thread to take a crap on the whole issue. The premise of this thread is B.S. At least CsG makes arguments to back up his statements, but you just keep spewing from your bowels. As CsG eloquently puts it, here's something to refuel yourself:
If you don't like me confronting you on your B.S., leave your thread.
The premise of this thread is a valid question: "do these memos exist?" I realize the you prefer bullsh1t over truth since it fits your agenda the best. Just like anything you libs do, half-truths and outright lies are OK as long as they serve their purpose. Nice trolling, but I don't buy your BS.
You're right, the premise of your thread is a valid question: "am I a tool?" Let me answer it for you. Yes, you are a tool.
You know the original memos have been destroyed, and that's why you're asking them.
I haven't seen the original copy of the Bible. I guess Jesus's word is all a lie.
THE ORIGINALS HAVE NOT BEEN DESTROYED!
THE REPORTER, WHO IS THE ONLY PERSON WHO HAD ACCESS TO PHOTOCOPIES OF THE ORIGINALS, DESTROYED THEM.
YOU WILL NEVER SEE THE ORIGINALS, OR A PHOTOCOPY OF THEM SINCE THEY ARE CONFIDENTIAL.
THAT IS WHY THESE CONS ARE ASKING FOR THEM, BECAUSE THEY KNOW NO ONE CAN OBTAIN THEM.
Then please state that the photocopies have been destroyed, not the originals.
There really is no difference, since you nor the cons will find either. So f.off.
shira
Diamond Member
- Jan 12, 2005
- 9,500
- 6
- 81
Great find!
But of course, CsG, AnyMal, and the rest of these self-delusory cretins will argue: All I see is black text on a white background on a computer screen. Where is your PROOF that this online article isn't a forgery? I want absolute proof that this story isn't a fabrication!!
But the beauty of this "strategy" of theirs is that they've totally painted themselves into a corner. ANY time in the future they make a statement, we can hold them to their own standard of "proof" and just laugh off their arguments as unfounded.
Originally posted by: Tab
Owned, Morgaged, Foreclosed.
I'm gonna spread my crap all over this thread just like AnyMal.
AnyMal, it's my turn!
Originally posted by: totalcommand
Originally posted by: Tab
Owned, Morgaged, Foreclosed.
I'm gonna spread my crap all over this thread just like AnyMal.
AnyMal, it's my turn!
Poser
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 22K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
News NVIDIA and Intel to Develop AI Infrastructure and Personal Computing Products- Started by poke01
- Replies: 411
-
Facebook
Twitter