Trump is not offering peace in Ukraine

[Atla]

“Today, it became clear that the free world needs a new leader. It’s up to us, Europeans, to take this challenge.” was said a few days ago. Yesterday many European countries agreed to continue supporting Ukraine and start arming. The UK and France are also considering to pool their nukes and create a European nuclear umbrella. Things are happening fast.

[Age]

Yes, it is an excuse.

If you really want to say it is an excuse for your failings and inabilities, then by all means keep on using excuses. you are, obviously, absolute, free to do so.

Nope, it's about not spending dozens of hours on your inabilities.

So, 'now', you are NOT absolutely free to use excuses.




Anyway, let 'us' go back to 'the beginning', and 'start again'.

me:
But, 'who' is 'the loser', here, exactly?

Obviously the "united states of america" is not and can not win, so it is 'losing' and 'the loser', here. Thus, why "donald trump" wants to just 'give up' and 'hand over' "ukraine" to "russia".

The "united states of america" can not beat "russia", here.

you:
And just how do you know that?

me:
If you would like for me to answer and clarify this clarifying question, here, then you will have to be far more specific in relation to what the 'that' word is in relation to, exactly.

you:
You quoted the specifics and skipped them.

me:
So, there are at least three things that you want me to inform you of how I know of, right?

you:
No.

me:
And, once again, this one fails, absolutely, in providing clarity and just clarifying things.

you:
I'm not required to cater to your autistic needs whenever you completely fail to understand ordinary human communication.

me:
Of course you are not.

Now, I made three obviously different claims, and "atla" wants me to inform it of how I know some 'thing'. However, "atla" clarified that it does NOT want me to inform it of how I know these three things, BUT does want me to inform it of how I know some 'thing', but "atla" is, unfortunately, completely incapable of just informing me of what 'that thing' is, exactly.

So, is there ANY one ELSE in this forum who knows what 'it' is, exactly, that "atla" wants me to inform it of how I know 'that', then would you please kindly clarify here, for me.

"atla" is, after all, under the impression that it is 'me', ONLY, who is NOT ABLE TO UNDERSTAND its so-claimed 'ordinary human communication', here.

If absolutely ANY one CAN UNDERSTAND "atla's" so-called 'ordinary human communication', then could you please pass 'it' on. That way you WILL SHOW and PROVE that "atla" IS RIGHT, and CORRECT, here.

[Age]

...and how do you know all that?

Wait and see. It'll all come out.

ONCE AGAIN, when this is QUESTIONED and CHALLENGED it is COMPLETELY INCAPABLE of ACCEPTING the CHALLENGE and, and by, just NOT ANSWERING and CLARIFYING.

How many CLAIMS is this one going to make but NOT back up and support its CLAIMS?

What you're saying...

No, Cathy Newman, I'm not "saying" any words you're trying to put in my mouth.

AGAIN, "immanuel can" is an "expert" AT 'TRYING TO' DEFLECT, and TO DECEIVE. But, REALLY actually HOPELESS at ANY REAL SUCCESS.

[Atla]

If you really want to say it is an excuse for your failings and inabilities, then by all means keep on using excuses. you are, obviously, absolute, free to do so.

Nope, it's about not spending dozens of hours on your inabilities.

So, 'now', you are NOT absolutely free to use excuses.




Anyway, let 'us' go back to 'the beginning', and 'start again'.

me:
But, 'who' is 'the loser', here, exactly?

Obviously the "united states of america" is not and can not win, so it is 'losing' and 'the loser', here. Thus, why "donald trump" wants to just 'give up' and 'hand over' "ukraine" to "russia".

The "united states of america" can not beat "russia", here.

you:
And just how do you know that?

me:
If you would like for me to answer and clarify this clarifying question, here, then you will have to be far more specific in relation to what the 'that' word is in relation to, exactly.

you:
You quoted the specifics and skipped them.

me:
So, there are at least three things that you want me to inform you of how I know of, right?

you:
No.

me:
And, once again, this one fails, absolutely, in providing clarity and just clarifying things.

you:
I'm not required to cater to your autistic needs whenever you completely fail to understand ordinary human communication.

me:
Of course you are not.

Now, I made three obviously different claims, and "atla" wants me to inform it of how I know some 'thing'. However, "atla" clarified that it does NOT want me to inform it of how I know these three things, BUT does want me to inform it of how I know some 'thing', but "atla" is, unfortunately, completely incapable of just informing me of what 'that thing' is, exactly.

So, is there ANY one ELSE in this forum who knows what 'it' is, exactly, that "atla" wants me to inform it of how I know 'that', then would you please kindly clarify here, for me.

"atla" is, after all, under the impression that it is 'me', ONLY, who is NOT ABLE TO UNDERSTAND its so-claimed 'ordinary human communication', here.

If absolutely ANY one CAN UNDERSTAND "atla's" so-called 'ordinary human communication', then could you please pass 'it' on. That way you WILL SHOW and PROVE that "atla" IS RIGHT, and CORRECT, here.

You didn't even make "three obviously different claims".

[Age]

Wait and see. It'll all come out.


No, Cathy Newman, I'm not "saying" any words you're trying to put in my mouth.

For it to all come out there has to be prior data indicating the possiblity that it may all eventually reveal itself.

Yep.

You're not going to believe it now, but you will later. Wait until it all comes out.

LOL
LOL
LOL

AGAIN, here, 'we' have ANOTHER ABSOLUTELY TERRIBLE ATTEMPT AT MAKING CLAIMS, WHILE HAVING ABSOLUTELY NOTHING AT ALL AS back up AND support.

[Atla]

If you really want to say it is an excuse for your failings and inabilities, then by all means keep on using excuses. you are, obviously, absolute, free to do so.

Nope, it's about not spending dozens of hours on your inabilities.

So, 'now', you are NOT absolutely free to use excuses.




Anyway, let 'us' go back to 'the beginning', and 'start again'.

me:
But, 'who' is 'the loser', here, exactly?

Obviously the "united states of america" is not and can not win, so it is 'losing' and 'the loser', here. Thus, why "donald trump" wants to just 'give up' and 'hand over' "ukraine" to "russia".

The "united states of america" can not beat "russia", here.

you:
And just how do you know that?

me:
If you would like for me to answer and clarify this clarifying question, here, then you will have to be far more specific in relation to what the 'that' word is in relation to, exactly.

you:
You quoted the specifics and skipped them.

me:
So, there are at least three things that you want me to inform you of how I know of, right?

you:
No.

me:
And, once again, this one fails, absolutely, in providing clarity and just clarifying things.

you:
I'm not required to cater to your autistic needs whenever you completely fail to understand ordinary human communication.

me:
Of course you are not.

Now, I made three obviously different claims, and "atla" wants me to inform it of how I know some 'thing'. However, "atla" clarified that it does NOT want me to inform it of how I know these three things, BUT does want me to inform it of how I know some 'thing', but "atla" is, unfortunately, completely incapable of just informing me of what 'that thing' is, exactly.

So, is there ANY one ELSE in this forum who knows what 'it' is, exactly, that "atla" wants me to inform it of how I know 'that', then would you please kindly clarify here, for me.

"atla" is, after all, under the impression that it is 'me', ONLY, who is NOT ABLE TO UNDERSTAND its so-claimed 'ordinary human communication', here.

If absolutely ANY one CAN UNDERSTAND "atla's" so-called 'ordinary human communication', then could you please pass 'it' on. That way you WILL SHOW and PROVE that "atla" IS RIGHT, and CORRECT, here.

Also, not winning doesn't necessarily mean losing either.

[Age]

Wait and see. It'll all come out.


No, Cathy Newman, I'm not "saying" any words you're trying to put in my mouth.

For it to all come out there has to be prior data indicating the possiblity that it may all eventually reveal itself.

Yep.

You're not going to believe it now, but you will later. Wait until it all comes out.

LOL

'This one' also CLAIMS that you are not going to believe it now that you are going to 'suffer in hell for eternity' if you 'do not start believing in "jesus", but you will believe it later. Just wait until you die and it comes out.

Talk ABOUT being absolutely RIDICULOUS, in the EXTREME.

[Age]

Nope, it's about not spending dozens of hours on your inabilities.

So, 'now', you are NOT absolutely free to use excuses.




Anyway, let 'us' go back to 'the beginning', and 'start again'.

me:
But, 'who' is 'the loser', here, exactly?

Obviously the "united states of america" is not and can not win, so it is 'losing' and 'the loser', here. Thus, why "donald trump" wants to just 'give up' and 'hand over' "ukraine" to "russia".

The "united states of america" can not beat "russia", here.

you:
And just how do you know that?

me:
If you would like for me to answer and clarify this clarifying question, here, then you will have to be far more specific in relation to what the 'that' word is in relation to, exactly.

you:
You quoted the specifics and skipped them.

me:
So, there are at least three things that you want me to inform you of how I know of, right?

you:
No.

me:
And, once again, this one fails, absolutely, in providing clarity and just clarifying things.

you:
I'm not required to cater to your autistic needs whenever you completely fail to understand ordinary human communication.

me:
Of course you are not.

Now, I made three obviously different claims, and "atla" wants me to inform it of how I know some 'thing'. However, "atla" clarified that it does NOT want me to inform it of how I know these three things, BUT does want me to inform it of how I know some 'thing', but "atla" is, unfortunately, completely incapable of just informing me of what 'that thing' is, exactly.

So, is there ANY one ELSE in this forum who knows what 'it' is, exactly, that "atla" wants me to inform it of how I know 'that', then would you please kindly clarify here, for me.

"atla" is, after all, under the impression that it is 'me', ONLY, who is NOT ABLE TO UNDERSTAND its so-claimed 'ordinary human communication', here.

If absolutely ANY one CAN UNDERSTAND "atla's" so-called 'ordinary human communication', then could you please pass 'it' on. That way you WILL SHOW and PROVE that "atla" IS RIGHT, and CORRECT, here.

You didn't even make "three obviously different claims".

It might be quite surprising, to some, that you did not see and notice three obvious different claims when it is 'you' who claims that it is 'me' who 'completely fails to understand ordinary human communication', here.

Now, how many claims did I make, to you, exactly?

And, what was it, or them, exactly?

And then, be CLEAR of what 'that' is, exactly, which you want me to inform you of how I know 'that'.

So far NO one ELSE has be able to CLARIFY, FOR you.

[Age]

Nope, it's about not spending dozens of hours on your inabilities.

So, 'now', you are NOT absolutely free to use excuses.




Anyway, let 'us' go back to 'the beginning', and 'start again'.

me:
But, 'who' is 'the loser', here, exactly?

Obviously the "united states of america" is not and can not win, so it is 'losing' and 'the loser', here. Thus, why "donald trump" wants to just 'give up' and 'hand over' "ukraine" to "russia".

The "united states of america" can not beat "russia", here.

you:
And just how do you know that?

me:
If you would like for me to answer and clarify this clarifying question, here, then you will have to be far more specific in relation to what the 'that' word is in relation to, exactly.

you:
You quoted the specifics and skipped them.

me:
So, there are at least three things that you want me to inform you of how I know of, right?

you:
No.

me:
And, once again, this one fails, absolutely, in providing clarity and just clarifying things.

you:
I'm not required to cater to your autistic needs whenever you completely fail to understand ordinary human communication.

me:
Of course you are not.

Now, I made three obviously different claims, and "atla" wants me to inform it of how I know some 'thing'. However, "atla" clarified that it does NOT want me to inform it of how I know these three things, BUT does want me to inform it of how I know some 'thing', but "atla" is, unfortunately, completely incapable of just informing me of what 'that thing' is, exactly.

So, is there ANY one ELSE in this forum who knows what 'it' is, exactly, that "atla" wants me to inform it of how I know 'that', then would you please kindly clarify here, for me.

"atla" is, after all, under the impression that it is 'me', ONLY, who is NOT ABLE TO UNDERSTAND its so-claimed 'ordinary human communication', here.

If absolutely ANY one CAN UNDERSTAND "atla's" so-called 'ordinary human communication', then could you please pass 'it' on. That way you WILL SHOW and PROVE that "atla" IS RIGHT, and CORRECT, here.

Also, not winning doesn't necessarily mean losing either.

If you say so. So, now, what does 'not winning' ACTUALLY MEAN, EXACTLY?

[Atla]

So, 'now', you are NOT absolutely free to use excuses.




Anyway, let 'us' go back to 'the beginning', and 'start again'.

me:
But, 'who' is 'the loser', here, exactly?

Obviously the "united states of america" is not and can not win, so it is 'losing' and 'the loser', here. Thus, why "donald trump" wants to just 'give up' and 'hand over' "ukraine" to "russia".

The "united states of america" can not beat "russia", here.

you:
And just how do you know that?

me:
If you would like for me to answer and clarify this clarifying question, here, then you will have to be far more specific in relation to what the 'that' word is in relation to, exactly.

you:
You quoted the specifics and skipped them.

me:
So, there are at least three things that you want me to inform you of how I know of, right?

you:
No.

me:
And, once again, this one fails, absolutely, in providing clarity and just clarifying things.

you:
I'm not required to cater to your autistic needs whenever you completely fail to understand ordinary human communication.

me:
Of course you are not.

Now, I made three obviously different claims, and "atla" wants me to inform it of how I know some 'thing'. However, "atla" clarified that it does NOT want me to inform it of how I know these three things, BUT does want me to inform it of how I know some 'thing', but "atla" is, unfortunately, completely incapable of just informing me of what 'that thing' is, exactly.

So, is there ANY one ELSE in this forum who knows what 'it' is, exactly, that "atla" wants me to inform it of how I know 'that', then would you please kindly clarify here, for me.

"atla" is, after all, under the impression that it is 'me', ONLY, who is NOT ABLE TO UNDERSTAND its so-claimed 'ordinary human communication', here.

If absolutely ANY one CAN UNDERSTAND "atla's" so-called 'ordinary human communication', then could you please pass 'it' on. That way you WILL SHOW and PROVE that "atla" IS RIGHT, and CORRECT, here.

You didn't even make "three obviously different claims".

It might be quite surprising, to some, that you did not see and notice three obvious different claims when it is 'you' who claims that it is 'me' who 'completely fails to understand ordinary human communication', here.

Now, how many claims did I make, to you, exactly?

And, what was it, or them, exactly?

And then, be CLEAR of what 'that' is, exactly, which you want me to inform you of how I know 'that'.

So far NO one ELSE has be able to CLARIFY, FOR you.

Just answer the question. Or are you ready to admit that you fucked up again. Talking about things with certainty that you know too little about, because you're a habitual liar.

[Age]

You didn't even make "three obviously different claims".

It might be quite surprising, to some, that you did not see and notice three obvious different claims when it is 'you' who claims that it is 'me' who 'completely fails to understand ordinary human communication', here.

Now, how many claims did I make, to you, exactly?

And, what was it, or them, exactly?

And then, be CLEAR of what 'that' is, exactly, which you want me to inform you of how I know 'that'.

So far NO one ELSE has be able to CLARIFY, FOR you.

Just answer the question. Or are you ready to admit that you fucked up again. Talking about things with certainty that you know too little about, because you're a habitual liar.

Once again, 'this one' JUST ENDS UP TO RESORTING TO THE, 'you are a LIAR', CLAIM.

AGAIN, 'we' START OUT with 'me' just ASKING 'you' CLARIFY some thing. 'you', UNFORTUNATELY, do NOT CLARIFY, and just END UP RESORTING TO what 'you' REALLY ONLY know, here, which is PUTTING OUT the COMPLETELY UNSUBSTANTIATED CLAIM that, 'I AM LYING, AGAIN'.

LOL 'you' NOT CLARIFYING NEVER MAKES NOR MEANS that is 'i' who is LYING, here.

Now, "atla" if you REALLY WANT 'me' TO ANSWER your QUESTION, 'And just how do you know that?', then 'you' WILL HAVE TO INFORM 'us' readers, here, what the 'that' word IS IN RELATION TO, EXACTLY.

So far, absolutely NO one ELSE HAS BEEN ABLE TO HELP you OUT, here. Which may well be BECAUSE they, ALSO, do NOT YET KNOW what your 'that' word is REFERRING TO, EXACTLY.

Therefore, UNTIL 'you' CLARIFY, I am UNABLE TO KNOW what you are REFERRING TO.

But, maybe you "yourself" do NOT even KNOW what the 'that' word IS REFERRING TO, EXACTLY. Which EXPLAINS WHY you do NOT JUST CLARIFY, here.

Oh, and by the way, what STILL STANDS, here, is that I CAN and WILL back up AND support EVERY thing I have SAID and CLAIMED, here.

So, ONCE MORE, if absolutely ANY one is READY TO and/or WOULD LIKE TO challenge and/or question 'me' OVER ANY thing that I have ACTUALLY SAID, and MEANT, here, then PLEASE DO.

I LOOK FORWARD TO the DISCUSSION.

Oh yeah, and again, what does 'not winning' ACTUALLY MEAN, EXACTLY?

[Atla]

It might be quite surprising, to some, that you did not see and notice three obvious different claims when it is 'you' who claims that it is 'me' who 'completely fails to understand ordinary human communication', here.

Now, how many claims did I make, to you, exactly?

And, what was it, or them, exactly?

And then, be CLEAR of what 'that' is, exactly, which you want me to inform you of how I know 'that'.

So far NO one ELSE has be able to CLARIFY, FOR you.

Just answer the question. Or are you ready to admit that you fucked up again. Talking about things with certainty that you know too little about, because you're a habitual liar.

Once again, 'this one' JUST ENDS UP TO RESORTING TO THE, 'you are a LIAR', CLAIM.

AGAIN, 'we' START OUT with 'me' just ASKING 'you' CLARIFY some thing. 'you', UNFORTUNATELY, do NOT CLARIFY, and just END UP RESORTING TO what 'you' REALLY ONLY know, here, which is PUTTING OUT the COMPLETELY UNSUBSTANTIATED CLAIM that, 'I AM LYING, AGAIN'.

LOL 'you' NOT CLARIFYING NEVER MAKES NOR MEANS that is 'i' who is LYING, here.

Now, "atla" if you REALLY WANT 'me' TO ANSWER your QUESTION, 'And just how do you know that?', then 'you' WILL HAVE TO INFORM 'us' readers, here, what the 'that' word IS IN RELATION TO, EXACTLY.

So far, absolutely NO one ELSE HAS BEEN ABLE TO HELP you OUT, here. Which may well be BECAUSE they, ALSO, do NOT YET KNOW what your 'that' word is REFERRING TO, EXACTLY.

Therefore, UNTIL 'you' CLARIFY, I am UNABLE TO KNOW what you are REFERRING TO.

But, maybe you "yourself" do NOT even KNOW what the 'that' word IS REFERRING TO, EXACTLY. Which EXPLAINS WHY you do NOT JUST CLARIFY, here.

Oh, and by the way, what STILL STANDS, here, is that I CAN and WILL back up AND support EVERY thing I have SAID and CLAIMED, here.

So, ONCE MORE, if absolutely ANY one is READY TO and/or WOULD LIKE TO challenge and/or question 'me' OVER ANY thing that I have ACTUALLY SAID, and MEANT, here, then PLEASE DO.

I LOOK FORWARD TO the DISCUSSION.

Oh yeah, and again, what does 'not winning' ACTUALLY MEAN, EXACTLY?

A wall of shouting instead of just answering the question. Age proves to be a liar again, not very surprising after the last 100 times Age has proven it.

[Age]

Just answer the question. Or are you ready to admit that you fucked up again. Talking about things with certainty that you know too little about, because you're a habitual liar.

Once again, 'this one' JUST ENDS UP TO RESORTING TO THE, 'you are a LIAR', CLAIM.

AGAIN, 'we' START OUT with 'me' just ASKING 'you' CLARIFY some thing. 'you', UNFORTUNATELY, do NOT CLARIFY, and just END UP RESORTING TO what 'you' REALLY ONLY know, here, which is PUTTING OUT the COMPLETELY UNSUBSTANTIATED CLAIM that, 'I AM LYING, AGAIN'.

LOL 'you' NOT CLARIFYING NEVER MAKES NOR MEANS that is 'i' who is LYING, here.

Now, "atla" if you REALLY WANT 'me' TO ANSWER your QUESTION, 'And just how do you know that?', then 'you' WILL HAVE TO INFORM 'us' readers, here, what the 'that' word IS IN RELATION TO, EXACTLY.

So far, absolutely NO one ELSE HAS BEEN ABLE TO HELP you OUT, here. Which may well be BECAUSE they, ALSO, do NOT YET KNOW what your 'that' word is REFERRING TO, EXACTLY.

Therefore, UNTIL 'you' CLARIFY, I am UNABLE TO KNOW what you are REFERRING TO.

But, maybe you "yourself" do NOT even KNOW what the 'that' word IS REFERRING TO, EXACTLY. Which EXPLAINS WHY you do NOT JUST CLARIFY, here.

Oh, and by the way, what STILL STANDS, here, is that I CAN and WILL back up AND support EVERY thing I have SAID and CLAIMED, here.

So, ONCE MORE, if absolutely ANY one is READY TO and/or WOULD LIKE TO challenge and/or question 'me' OVER ANY thing that I have ACTUALLY SAID, and MEANT, here, then PLEASE DO.

I LOOK FORWARD TO the DISCUSSION.

Oh yeah, and again, what does 'not winning' ACTUALLY MEAN, EXACTLY?

A wall of shouting instead of just answering the question. Age proves to be a liar again, not very surprising after the last 100 times Age has proven it.

LOL

AGAIN,

1. NOT one single word of shouting.

2. I am, STILL, TRYING TO GET you TO CLARIFY what 'it' is, EXACTLY, what you want me to ANSWER.

3. SEEKING OUT CLARITY, FROM you, BEFORE I KNOW what TO ANSWER, EXACTLY, is NOT being A 'liar'.

4. you have CLAIMED, an unknown amount of times, that I have LIED. Now. NOT ONCE have you backed up and supported this CLAIM of yours, even AFTER I HAVE SPECIFICALLY ASKED you TO.

5. Now, this time, you are CLAIMING that I have PROVEN TO BE A LIAR, at least 100 times. So, this gives you, at least 100 chances, to link 'us' to WHERE you BELIEVE I HAVE PROVEN TO have LIED.

Will you DO this, this time?

We WILL have TO WAIT, TO SEE. But, going on your past experiences absolutely NOTHING will be FORTH COMING.


LOL ALSO, you CLAIM that 'not winning doesn't necessarily mean losing either', so I just ASK you TO CLARIFY, 'what does 'not winning' ACTUALLY MEAN, EXACTLY?'

Yet you are NOT EVEN ABLE to just CLARIFY this.

[Atla]

Once again, 'this one' JUST ENDS UP TO RESORTING TO THE, 'you are a LIAR', CLAIM.

AGAIN, 'we' START OUT with 'me' just ASKING 'you' CLARIFY some thing. 'you', UNFORTUNATELY, do NOT CLARIFY, and just END UP RESORTING TO what 'you' REALLY ONLY know, here, which is PUTTING OUT the COMPLETELY UNSUBSTANTIATED CLAIM that, 'I AM LYING, AGAIN'.

LOL 'you' NOT CLARIFYING NEVER MAKES NOR MEANS that is 'i' who is LYING, here.

Now, "atla" if you REALLY WANT 'me' TO ANSWER your QUESTION, 'And just how do you know that?', then 'you' WILL HAVE TO INFORM 'us' readers, here, what the 'that' word IS IN RELATION TO, EXACTLY.

So far, absolutely NO one ELSE HAS BEEN ABLE TO HELP you OUT, here. Which may well be BECAUSE they, ALSO, do NOT YET KNOW what your 'that' word is REFERRING TO, EXACTLY.

Therefore, UNTIL 'you' CLARIFY, I am UNABLE TO KNOW what you are REFERRING TO.

But, maybe you "yourself" do NOT even KNOW what the 'that' word IS REFERRING TO, EXACTLY. Which EXPLAINS WHY you do NOT JUST CLARIFY, here.

Oh, and by the way, what STILL STANDS, here, is that I CAN and WILL back up AND support EVERY thing I have SAID and CLAIMED, here.

So, ONCE MORE, if absolutely ANY one is READY TO and/or WOULD LIKE TO challenge and/or question 'me' OVER ANY thing that I have ACTUALLY SAID, and MEANT, here, then PLEASE DO.

I LOOK FORWARD TO the DISCUSSION.

Oh yeah, and again, what does 'not winning' ACTUALLY MEAN, EXACTLY?

A wall of shouting instead of just answering the question. Age proves to be a liar again, not very surprising after the last 100 times Age has proven it.

LOL

AGAIN,

1. NOT one single word of shouting.

2. I am, STILL, TRYING TO GET you TO CLARIFY what 'it' is, EXACTLY, what you want me to ANSWER.

3. SEEKING OUT CLARITY, FROM you, BEFORE I KNOW what TO ANSWER, EXACTLY, is NOT being A 'liar'.

4. you have CLAIMED, an unknown amount of times, that I have LIED. Now. NOT ONCE have you backed up and supported this CLAIM of yours, even AFTER I HAVE SPECIFICALLY ASKED you TO.

5. Now, this time, you are CLAIMING that I have PROVEN TO BE A LIAR, at least 100 times. So, this gives you, at least 100 chances, to link 'us' to WHERE you BELIEVE I HAVE PROVEN TO have LIED.

Will you DO this, this time?

We WILL have TO WAIT, TO SEE. But, going on your past experiences absolutely NOTHING will be FORTH COMING.


LOL ALSO, you CLAIM that 'not winning doesn't necessarily mean losing either', so I just ASK you TO CLARIFY, 'what does 'not winning' ACTUALLY MEAN, EXACTLY?'

Yet you are NOT EVEN ABLE to just CLARIFY this.

Again a wall of shouting instead of just answering the question. And the retard now wants me to define the expression that he/she brought up.

[Age]

A wall of shouting instead of just answering the question. Age proves to be a liar again, not very surprising after the last 100 times Age has proven it.

LOL

AGAIN,

1. NOT one single word of shouting.

2. I am, STILL, TRYING TO GET you TO CLARIFY what 'it' is, EXACTLY, what you want me to ANSWER.

3. SEEKING OUT CLARITY, FROM you, BEFORE I KNOW what TO ANSWER, EXACTLY, is NOT being A 'liar'.

4. you have CLAIMED, an unknown amount of times, that I have LIED. Now. NOT ONCE have you backed up and supported this CLAIM of yours, even AFTER I HAVE SPECIFICALLY ASKED you TO.

5. Now, this time, you are CLAIMING that I have PROVEN TO BE A LIAR, at least 100 times. So, this gives you, at least 100 chances, to link 'us' to WHERE you BELIEVE I HAVE PROVEN TO have LIED.

Will you DO this, this time?

We WILL have TO WAIT, TO SEE. But, going on your past experiences absolutely NOTHING will be FORTH COMING.


LOL ALSO, you CLAIMED 'not winning doesn't necessarily mean losing either', so I just ASK you TO CLARIFY, 'what does 'not winning' ACTUALLY MEAN, EXACTLY?'

Yet you are NOT EVEN ABLE to just CLARIFY this.

Again a wall of shouting instead of just answering the question.

LOL There is NOT A SINGLE WORD OF shouting. As I have ALREADY EXPLAINED NUMEROUS TIMES OVER.

And, 'this one' is NOT EVEN ABLE TO CLEARLY EXPRESS what it even WANTS ANSWERED, here.

And the retard now wants me to define the expression that he/she brought up.

It was, OBVIOUSLY, "atla" who was 'the one' that CLAIMED that 'not winning doesn't necessarily mean losing either'.

And, 'i' was just 'the one' that just ASKED it, 'What does 'not winning' ACTUALLY MEAN, EXACTLY?'

However, "atla", once more, IS COMPLETELY INCAPABLE OF JUST EXPLAINING what 'it' AND 'not winning' ACTUALLY MEANS.