The thought police have arrived...

[Rey Lengua]

Originally Posted by i'va biggen

Senile old fart, you keep putting words in someones mouth. Thanks for taking over gay rey's job of stalking, and deflection. Hope sometime you can have a thought. Keep parroting Trump's words.

And we all know how YOU prefer for "people " to put dicks and dingle berries in YOUR mouth EKIM ! Work them KansASS gloryholes !

[Guest042616-1]

Originally Posted by I B Hankering

You're an equivocating SOB, eatbibeau. "Decimate" and "defeated" have the same synonyms, eatbibeau.

You mean they are synonyms, but you are still wrong. They are close in definition, but they don't mean the same thing. But even if we pretend that they have the same meaning, he said this about their leadership, not the outfit as a whole. So even if we treat them as the same word you're still wrong.

And "on the run" means "in retreat", and "retreats" in military parlance follow "defeats", eatbibeau.

You think any time you retreat in the military means you are defeated? You know nothing about military strategy. Especially guerrilla strategy.

You can keep desperately attempting to twist his words so you can pretend that Obama said they were defeated. Not only has he never actually said this, he has repeatedly stated during these same time frames that they still pose a threat. He, at no point, said they were no longer a threat to us and has explicitly said the opposite.

Once again, you are believing what some talking heads have intentionally led you to believe, not something that accurately reflects the reality of what Obama has said. Think for yourself.

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by eatfibo

You mean they are synonyms, but you are still wrong. They are close in definition, but they don't mean the same thing. But even if we pretend that they have the same meaning, he said this about their leadership, not the outfit as a whole. So even if we treat them as the same word you're still wrong.

You think any time you retreat in the military means you are defeated? You know nothing about military strategy. Especially guerrilla strategy.

You can keep desperately attempting to twist his words so you can pretend that Obama said they were defeated. Not only has he never actually said this, he has repeatedly stated during these same time frames that they still pose a threat. He, at no point, said they were no longer a threat to us and has explicitly said the opposite.

Once again, you are believing what some talking heads have intentionally led you to believe, not something that accurately reflects the reality of what Obama has said. Think for yourself.

The talking heads you are listening to and defending -- Odumbo and Hildebeest -- are the liars, eatbibeau, and "decimated" and "on the run" means "defeated" in every language but lib-retard equivocation, eatbibeau.

[Guest042616-1]

Originally Posted by I B Hankering

The talking heads you are listening to and defending -- Odumbo and Hildebeest -- are the liars, eatbibeau, and "decimated" and "on the run" means "defeated" in every language but lib-retard equivocation, eatbibeau.

I've pointed out to you that he has explicitly said the exact opposite during the same time frame. If you don't want to accept what he has explicitly said, but rather what you wish he had said, that's your choice. It doesn't make any sense to hold this position, so I won't bother trying to make sense of it any more for you.

[Mr MojoRisin]

Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

If none of this exists, then why do you deem this worthy of conversation? EVery day?

Frankly, I find the entire climate change denial thing to be laughable. You don't believe it. You don't believe it. You don't believe it.

When you go to the doctor and are diagnosed with a disease, will it get better if you don't believe it?

You believe in the resurrection of Jesus Nazarine but you don't believe in climate change.

Who do you believe?

The oil industry?

Ben Carson?

IBIdiot?

The issue isn't Climate Change. Everyone knows that occurs naturally. It's adverse intervention by "Man" that is the cause of Climate Change. That's the pitch we are getting.
Nothing but talk, never any possible solutions to reverse the problem if indeed it is a problem.

Jim

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by eatfibo

I've pointed out to you that he has explicitly said the exact opposite during the same time frame. If you don't want to accept what he has explicitly said, but rather what you wish he had said, that's your choice. It doesn't make any sense to hold this position, so I won't bother trying to make sense of it any more for you.

The only thing you have pointed out is your ability to persist as an equivocating, lib-retard, eatbibeau. By your definition, Napoleon's retreat from Moscow wasn't precipitated by his defeat at Moscow, eatbibeau.

[CuteOldGuy]

Originally Posted by i'va biggen

McCarthyism has reared it's ugly head again.

What did you mean by this, LittleLiberalEva? You are attacking people who oppose the criminalization of climate change dissent. You must support criminalization of speech, or you wouldn't be calling them McCarthyites. What is it, LittleLiberalEva? Should climate change dissent be against the law? Yes or no?

[Guest042616-1]

Originally Posted by I B Hankering

The only thing you have pointed out is your ability to persist as an equivocating, lib-retard, eatbibeau. By your definition, Napoleon's retreat from Moscow wasn't precipitated by his defeat at Moscow, eatbibeau.

You keep telling yourself that Obama hasn't explicitly said, numerous times, that Al Qaeda remains a threat. It is just as ridiculously wrong now as it was the first time.

[Yssup Rider]

Originally Posted by Mr MojoRisin

The issue isn't Climate Change. Everyone knows that occurs naturally. It's adverse intervention by "Man" that is the cause of Climate Change. That's the pitch we are getting.
Nothing but talk, never any possible solutions to reverse the problem if indeed it is a problem.

Jim

Really? Nobody's suggested anything?

WOW! Alllllrighty then!

[Yssup Rider]

Originally Posted by eatfibo

You mean they are synonyms, but you are still wrong. They are close in definition, but they don't mean the same thing. But even if we pretend that they have the same meaning, he said this about their leadership, not the outfit as a whole. So even if we treat them as the same word you're still wrong.


You think any time you retreat in the military means you are defeated? You know nothing about military strategy. Especially guerrilla strategy.

You can keep desperately attempting to twist his words so you can pretend that Obama said they were defeated. Not only has he never actually said this, he has repeatedly stated during these same time frames that they still pose a threat. He, at no point, said they were no longer a threat to us and has explicitly said the opposite.

Once again, you are believing what some talking heads have intentionally led you to believe, not something that accurately reflects the reality of what Obama has said. Think for yourself.

Expect a similar, if not identical, reply from IBIdiot.

It is what he does.

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by eatfibo

You keep telling yourself that Obama hasn't explicitly said, numerous times, that Al Qaeda remains a threat. It is just as ridiculously wrong now as it was the first time.

You just keep ignoring how Odumbo dropped the "on the run" part of his stump speeches in his speeches shortly after Benghazi, eatbibeau.

Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

Expect a similar, if not identical, reply from IBIdiot.

It is what he does.

[Guest042616-1]

Originally Posted by I B Hankering

You just keep ignoring how Odumbo dropped the "on the run" part of his stump speeches in his speeches shortly after Benghazi, eatbibeau.

In what fantasy land did I ignore this? I've addressed it directly multiple times. I've pointed out how absurd it is to claim this equivalent to saying they are "defeated," especially when he has explicitly said they still pose a threat.

Do you always just make up nonsense in weak attempt to make your point?

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by eatfibo

In what fantasy land did I ignore this? I've addressed it directly multiple times. I've pointed out how absurd it is to claim this equivalent to saying they are "defeated," especially when he has explicitly said they still pose a threat.

Do you always just make up nonsense in weak attempt to make your point?

Odumbo's pronouncing that al Qaeda was "decimated" and "on the run" is equivalent to saying al Qaeda was defeated, eatbibeau, and no amount of deflection and equivocation on your part is going to change that fundamental fact, eatbibeau. That fact, and the recent revelation that Odumbo, et al, were cooking the books on the intel to sustain their lie is remarkably similar to what Odumbo and his DOJ are accusing some petrochemical companies of doing in regards to climate change. What's good for the goose is good for the gander, eatbibeau.

[CuteOldGuy]

Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

Really? Nobody's suggested anything?

WOW! Alllllrighty then!

What do you suggest, AssupTrump? Or do you just want to bitch?

[Mr MojoRisin]

Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

Really? Nobody's suggested anything?

WOW! Alllllrighty then!

I don't know what you've been reading, but there hasn't been any implementation of any viable solution to reverse or minimize the impact of Climate Change brought on my man. Climate change has been over politicized it will never be solved. Just like Poverty, Racism, Terrorism and any other political issue.

Jim


Jim