3 edits
Originally posted by mghrn55Oh how I search for meaning but all is vanity and a striving after the wind, chess is empty, so is Crusty and Randers and you. Its a void, a chasm, an emptiness, a tundra region over which the wind endlessly blows, a slain knight lies undiscovered, his hawk and his hound have left and his lady has taken another mate in his absence. Two crows pick at his golden locks gathering thatch for their nest!
I wasn't vilifying you.
But I guess I misjudged the thickness of your skin. 😀
2 edits
Originally posted by robbie carrobierobbie,
I resurrected your doomed thread, you have contributed nada but your usual whinging. When are you going to contribute something other than this nothingness Crusty?
You are not only thick skinned your thick headed. I am a Canadian I started the thread so people could give their thoughts on the 3rd debate between Clinton & Trump.
All you've managed to contribute is a lot of name calling and finger pointing. We are ALL getting very bored with this from you.
-VR
- Joined
- 14 Mar 04
- Moves
- 205549
Originally posted by Very RustyJust this?
robbie,
You are not only thick skinned your thick headed. I am a Canadian I started the thread so people could give their thoughts on the 3rd debate between Clinton & Trump.
All you've managed to contribute is a lot of name calling and finger pointing. We are ALL getting very bored with this from you.
-VR
1 edit
Originally posted by Very Rustydude i don't even read your texts any more, they are empty, a sad reflection of their creator.
robbie,
You are not only thick skinned your thick headed. I am a Canadian I started the thread so people could give their thoughts on the 3rd debate between Clinton & Trump.
All you've managed to contribute is a lot of name calling and finger pointing. We are ALL getting very bored with this from you.
-VR
Originally posted by robbie carrobieStop wasting your time with these doctored emails. Your credibility is zero.
prepared to try to undermine the credibility of the BBC Randolph Gandolp?
Lets see you squirm outta this.
16 revelations from Wikileaks' hacked Clinton emails
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-37639370
Zero point zero.
1 edit
Originally posted by HandyAndy'Doctored emails', ouch, you have evidence of course that they were doctored, even Podesta has not said as much, perhaps you know more than him, here is your chance, what evidence do you have that the emails have been doctored? This should be good.
Stop wasting your time with these doctored emails. Your credibility is zero.
Zero point zero.
Originally posted by robbie carrobie"Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta, whose emails were hacked, has claimed the Russian government was behind the leak and the Trump campaign knew about it in advance. He has refused to confirm or deny the emails' authenticity, suggesting some could have been doctored, without so far pinpointing any of the correspondence as fake."
'Doctored emails', ouch, you have evidence of course that they were doctored, even Podesta has not said as much, perhaps you know more than him, here is your chance, what evidence do you have that the emails have been doctored? This should be good.
--BBC News
2 edits
Originally posted by HandyAndyyes but your claim was that they have been doctored, I am asking you how you know? what evidence do you have that they have been doctored as you have claimed.
"Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta, whose emails were hacked, has claimed the Russian government was behind the leak and the Trump campaign knew about it in advance. He has refused to confirm or deny the emails' authenticity, suggesting some could have been doctored, without so far pinpointing any of the correspondence as fake."
--BBC News
with these doctored emails - Handy Andy
Originally posted by HandyAndyI have no way of telling if they are authentic or not, but then again i have not made a claim that I cannot substantiate, are you going to tell us how you know they are doctored as you have claimed or shall I mock you for lack of credibility?
Can you prove they are authentic?
Originally posted by robbie carrobieIf you can't prove they're authentic, you're forced to admit they could have been doctored.
I have no way of telling if they are authentic or not, but then again i have not made a claim that I cannot substantiate, are you going to tell us how you know they are doctored as you have claimed or shall I mock you for lack of credibility?
Your credibility, as both of us know, is zero.
Zero point zero.
1 edit
Originally posted by HandyAndyMy inability to provide evidence that they are authentic is not in anyway connected with the claim that you made and cannot substantiate, that the emails are doctored, so you will provide the evidence for your claim.
If you can't prove they're authentic, you're forced to admit they could have been doctored.
Your credibility, as both of us know, is zero.
Zero point zero.
Furthermore here you are calling into question the credibility of others when you yourself have been caught blatantly making claims that you have zero evidence for and cannot substantiate. This seems to be going from bad to worse for you Randolph, why don't you cut your losses while you can instead of doing the crash and burn because you are heading that way.
Do you normally make claims that you cannot substantiate?