Assange Amazing Adventures of Captain Neo in Blonde Land.

by **JackRiddler** » Sat Apr 20, 2019 1:21 pm

.

Just admit your "error" above. I barely give a shit about your 1001 indirect falsehoods or possible delusions.

Factual falsehoods are a different matter. It is objectively, provably, completely untrue, what you wrote. And so simple for you to fix.

Or if you like, keep doubling down and personalizin, until, with some luck, you get yourself banned.

.

by **seemslikeadream** » Sat Apr 20, 2019 1:22 pm

you made a factual mistake saying this thread was full of lies..what you wrote

this is lovely

I barely give a shit about your 1001 indirect falsehoods or possible delusions.

according to you, you really know how to turn a phrase

by **JackRiddler** » Sat Apr 20, 2019 1:30 pm

.

Okay, it's not full of lies, in the stupidly literal sense of consisting of 100% lies.

It is more infested with lies, in the sense of having a great many indirect ones, lies in spirit, propaganda, etc. It is SLAD's personal Assange defamation thread, mostly a vanity project but occasionally interrupted by other posters who can't believe this shit.

There, happy? I directly addressed your concern. Now can you address mine?

I don't give a shit about your board flooding, since I can't control it. But I have caught you making a direct lie, and you refuse to acknowledge the issue. Can you correct it before the mod, who has been alerted, arrives and agrees that YOU HAVE LIED? Because it's a lie.

seemslikeadream » Sat Apr 20, 2019 11:08 am wrote:WikiLeaks withheld a US military document that proves the U.S. never had any intention of "regime change" in Syria, and that, in fact, it wants the Alawite-Baathist regime to stay in power.

Fact: Wikileaks provided the document. No one else did that. Wikileaks published the document soon after they received it in the Stratfor data dump.

.

by **seemslikeadream** » Sat Apr 20, 2019 1:32 pm

you did not address my concerns

But I have caught you making a direct lie

by **liminalOyster** » Sat Apr 20, 2019 1:33 pm

by **seemslikeadream** » Sat Apr 20, 2019 1:35 pm

I hope you are not putting words in my mouth I never said any of that

by **seemslikeadream** » Sat Apr 20, 2019 1:36 pm

oh I see this was all to get this thread locked ..I understand now

by **seemslikeadream** » Sat Apr 20, 2019 1:36 pm

JackRiddler » Sat Apr 20, 2019 12:21 pm wrote:.

Just admit your "error" above. I barely give a shit about your 1001 indirect falsehoods or possible delusions.

Factual falsehoods are a different matter. It is objectively, provably, completely untrue, what you wrote. And so simple for you to fix.

Or if you like, keep doubling down and personalizin, until, with some luck, you get yourself banned.

.

by **RocketMan** » Sat Apr 20, 2019 1:37 pm

liminalOyster wrote:Except ... fucking entirely believable.

Too true.

by **liminalOyster** » Sat Apr 20, 2019 1:38 pm

seemslikeadream » Sat Apr 20, 2019 1:36 pm wrote:oh I see this was all to get this thread locked ..I understand now

No. I believe I started this with a friendly question and that was not my intent. Going to move my own recent post to another thread out of respect for yours despite disagreement.

by **seemslikeadream** » Sat Apr 20, 2019 1:39 pm

I was talking about Jack not you liminalOyster

Jack wants this thread locked he says it is full of lies. He has asked for it to be locked

so odd because he asked me to start this thread :roll:

he wants it locked now

if every thread is going to be locked because someone says someone told a lie we'd have a whole bunch of locked threads but maybe things have changed ...another one of Jack's new rules

51 pages and Jack has found one "lie" so it has to be locked!

liminalOyster » Sat Apr 20, 2019 12:38 pm wrote:
seemslikeadream » Sat Apr 20, 2019 1:36 pm wrote:oh I see this was all to get this thread locked ..I understand now

No. I believe I started this with a friendly question and that was not my intent. Going to move my own recent post to another thread out of respect for yours despite disagreement.

by **JackRiddler** » Sat Apr 20, 2019 1:51 pm

.

Just keep digging. I'd be thrilled to see this thread locked, or you to come to your senses and ask for the title to be changed. But it's not my motivation to post here, and thus kick this shitty storehouse of anti-Wikileaks propaganda.

I caught you lying. On a factual matter. Directly provable. Tough shit, that's what happened, and you will post a fucking encyclopedia of denial and dissembling rather than acknowledge it.

You could acknowledge the complete untruth of what you posted, and claim it was an error.

But until then, this is a lie and you are a liar:

seemslikeadream » Sat Apr 20, 2019 11:08 am wrote:WikiLeaks withheld a US military document that proves the U.S. never had any intention of "regime change" in Syria, and that, in fact, it wants the Alawite-Baathist regime to stay in power.

Fact: Wikileaks provided the document. No one else did that. Wikileaks published the document soon after they received it in the Stratfor data dump. Otherwise you would not know the document existed. Otherwise Nafeez would not have been able to use it in his article.

.

by **seemslikeadream** » Sat Apr 20, 2019 1:57 pm

you've lied about me and if you succeed in getting this thread locked because of my interpretation of an article that I may have been wrong about so be it ..have it your way Jack

but your excuse has NEVER happened here before NO one has ever got a thread locked because some one accused someone of telling a lie

by **RocketMan** » Sat Apr 20, 2019 1:58 pm

Who here is demanding to get "this thread locked"? This is again utter insanity. I literally have no idea what you're talking about.

by **seemslikeadream** » Sat Apr 20, 2019 1:59 pm

read the headline in Jack's posts :roll:

The title of this thread is disgusting, it should be locked.

he absolutely wants this thread locked because it is full of lies

that is the lie he is telling to get this thread locked :starz: