15 Mar 2022, 11:12 pm
Kraichgauer wrote:
Pepe wrote:
VegetableMan wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
By the way, I took another look at the article I originally posted, and I fail to see what I'm wrong about. Romney and Kinzinger both called what she said treasonous. How did I misreport that? That she might or might not be correct isn't the point.
Again, these are not Putin's bio labs, nor is anyone accusing Gabbard of defending them even if they were.
Your opening statement was completely wrong. Why can't you just admit it? You can still agree that her words were treasonous, even if it's a completely ridiculous claim.
My friend is "resilient".
Well, show you're not partisan and give me a little support. You have to know I didn't say the alleged bio labs were Putin's!
I can't see anything wrong with what you said in the first post in this thread.
Howzat?
Kraichgauer
Veteran
Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 47,778
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.
16 Mar 2022, 1:55 am
Pepe wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Pepe wrote:
VegetableMan wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
By the way, I took another look at the article I originally posted, and I fail to see what I'm wrong about. Romney and Kinzinger both called what she said treasonous. How did I misreport that? That she might or might not be correct isn't the point.
Again, these are not Putin's bio labs, nor is anyone accusing Gabbard of defending them even if they were.
Your opening statement was completely wrong. Why can't you just admit it? You can still agree that her words were treasonous, even if it's a completely ridiculous claim.
My friend is "resilient".
Well, show you're not partisan and give me a little support. You have to know I didn't say the alleged bio labs were Putin's!
I can't see anything wrong with what you said in the first post in this thread.
Howzat?
THANK YOU!
16 Mar 2022, 2:01 am
Kraichgauer wrote:
Pepe wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Pepe wrote:
VegetableMan wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
By the way, I took another look at the article I originally posted, and I fail to see what I'm wrong about. Romney and Kinzinger both called what she said treasonous. How did I misreport that? That she might or might not be correct isn't the point.
Again, these are not Putin's bio labs, nor is anyone accusing Gabbard of defending them even if they were.
Your opening statement was completely wrong. Why can't you just admit it? You can still agree that her words were treasonous, even if it's a completely ridiculous claim.
My friend is "resilient".
Well, show you're not partisan and give me a little support. You have to know I didn't say the alleged bio labs were Putin's!
I can't see anything wrong with what you said in the first post in this thread.
Howzat?
THANK YOU!
Kraichgauer
Veteran
Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 47,778
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.
16 Mar 2022, 2:05 am
16 Mar 2022, 2:21 am
Kraichgauer wrote:
^^^
I don't think my wife would like it.
I don't think my wife would like it.
Invite her.
16 Mar 2022, 3:11 am
16 Mar 2022, 3:29 am
Pepe wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
^^^
I don't think my wife would like it.
I don't think my wife would like it.
Invite her.
Get a room guys
16 Mar 2022, 3:36 am
VegetableMan wrote:
Ok, here's the opening statement once again:
This is no way what the story was about. It was a total misrepresentation of the article to which you linked which I'm quite you never read before you created this thread
Quote:
Both Kinzinger and Romney call Tulsi Gabbard's defense of [Putin's bio lab claims in Ukraine treason.
This is no way what the story was about. It was a total misrepresentation of the article to which you linked which I'm quite you never read before you created this thread
The sentence is a little confusing, but doesn't it say:
Russia accuses the US of having involvement in bio-labs in Ukraine.
(I believe it has been proven that this is the case.)
Gabbard agrees with this.
The problem you have is that the Russians also say that these bio-labs have been weaponised?
Is this correct?
Does Gabbard say she believes these labs have been weaponised?
Exactly what do you have a problem with?
Could you spell it out for the dummies?
I haven't read all the posts in the thread, btw.
Let us cut to the chase.
16 Mar 2022, 3:37 am
cyberdad wrote:
Pepe wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
^^^
I don't think my wife would like it.
I don't think my wife would like it.
Invite her.
Get a room guys
You and Kraichgauer are *suspiciously* close.
I hope you aren't jealous.
16 Mar 2022, 3:39 am
Pepe wrote:
cyberdad wrote:
Pepe wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
^^^
I don't think my wife would like it.
I don't think my wife would like it.
Invite her.
Get a room guys
You and Kraichgauer are *suspiciously* close.
I hope you aren't jealous.
I'm the one who suspects you are both developing an "enge Freundschaft"
16 Mar 2022, 3:51 am
Pepe wrote:
VegetableMan wrote:
Ok, here's the opening statement once again:
This is no way what the story was about. It was a total misrepresentation of the article to which you linked which I'm quite you never read before you created this thread
Quote:
Both Kinzinger and Romney call Tulsi Gabbard's defense of [Putin's bio lab claims in Ukraine treason.
This is no way what the story was about. It was a total misrepresentation of the article to which you linked which I'm quite you never read before you created this thread
The sentence is a little confusing, but doesn't it say:
Russia accuses the US of having involvement in bio-labs in Ukraine.
(I believe it has been proven that this is the case.)
Gabbard agrees with this.
The problem you have is that the Russians also say that these bio-labs have been weaponised?
Is this correct?
Does Gabbard say she believes these labs have been weaponised?
Exactly what do you have a problem with?
Could you spell it out for the dummies?
I haven't read all the posts in the thread, btw.
Let us cut to the chase.
I haven't heard anything about Russia claiming the labs were weaponized, but that's beside the point. Gabbard did not claim they were weaponized, nor did she say they were Putin's bio labs. All she said were they were U.S. backed bio research labs that needed to be secured for the safety of the world.
16 Mar 2022, 4:02 am
VegetableMan wrote:
Pepe wrote:
VegetableMan wrote:
Ok, here's the opening statement once again:
This is no way what the story was about. It was a total misrepresentation of the article to which you linked which I'm quite you never read before you created this thread
Quote:
Both Kinzinger and Romney call Tulsi Gabbard's defense of [Putin's bio lab claims in Ukraine treason.
This is no way what the story was about. It was a total misrepresentation of the article to which you linked which I'm quite you never read before you created this thread
The sentence is a little confusing, but doesn't it say:
Russia accuses the US of having involvement in bio-labs in Ukraine.
(I believe it has been proven that this is the case.)
Gabbard agrees with this.
The problem you have is that the Russians also say that these bio-labs have been weaponised?
Is this correct?
Does Gabbard say she believes these labs have been weaponised?
Exactly what do you have a problem with?
Could you spell it out for the dummies?
I haven't read all the posts in the thread, btw.
Let us cut to the chase.
I haven't heard anything about Russia claiming the labs were weaponized, but that's beside the point. Gabbard did not claim they were weaponized, nor did she say they were Putin's bio labs. All she said were they were U.S. backed bio research labs that needed to be secured for the safety of the world.
I think you misread the original post.
No one was claiming the labs in Ukraine were Russian.
It was Russian *claims* that there were bio-labs in Ukraine and that the US was involved with, (which apparently is true) that Gabbard agreed with.
Are we good now?
16 Mar 2022, 4:09 am
16 Mar 2022, 4:14 am
VegetableMan wrote:
The bottom line is K didn't read the article he posted and didn't understand what the issue was about. Period!
We're four pages in and I honestly don't know why I'm bothering with it, but holy s**t balls! I've never seen anyone go to such lengths to avoid admitting they just didn't understand the issue.
I find it fascinating, I guess.
We're four pages in and I honestly don't know why I'm bothering with it, but holy s**t balls! I've never seen anyone go to such lengths to avoid admitting they just didn't understand the issue.
I find it fascinating, I guess.
And yet you can't simply answer what part indicated he didn't read the article.
Do you see my problem?
16 Mar 2022, 4:52 am
Pepe wrote:
VegetableMan wrote:
The bottom line is K didn't read the article he posted and didn't understand what the issue was about. Period!
We're four pages in and I honestly don't know why I'm bothering with it, but holy s**t balls! I've never seen anyone go to such lengths to avoid admitting they just didn't understand the issue.
I find it fascinating, I guess.
We're four pages in and I honestly don't know why I'm bothering with it, but holy s**t balls! I've never seen anyone go to such lengths to avoid admitting they just didn't understand the issue.
I find it fascinating, I guess.
And yet you can't simply answer what part indicated he didn't read the article.
Do you see my problem?
Actually, I was wrong. I misinterpreted his statement altogether.
Still, Gabbard wasn't wrong. The labs are backed by the U.S. and need to be secured.
I am not well, right now. It's time for me to leave and take care of myself. Clearly I'm suffering some cognitive issues.
16 Mar 2022, 6:13 am
VegetableMan wrote:
Pepe wrote:
VegetableMan wrote:
The bottom line is K didn't read the article he posted and didn't understand what the issue was about. Period!
We're four pages in and I honestly don't know why I'm bothering with it, but holy s**t balls! I've never seen anyone go to such lengths to avoid admitting they just didn't understand the issue.
I find it fascinating, I guess.
We're four pages in and I honestly don't know why I'm bothering with it, but holy s**t balls! I've never seen anyone go to such lengths to avoid admitting they just didn't understand the issue.
I find it fascinating, I guess.
And yet you can't simply answer what part indicated he didn't read the article.
Do you see my problem?
Actually, I was wrong. I misinterpreted his statement altogether.
Still, Gabbard wasn't wrong. The labs are backed by the U.S. and need to be secured.
I am not well, right now. It's time for me to leave and take care of myself. Clearly I'm suffering some cognitive issues.
Kudos.
