01 dec 2022 om 14:58Update: 28 minuten geleden The police intervened on Thursday at a demonstration by farmers in front of the province of Overijssel in Zwolle. Three arrests have been made. A tractor that was in the way has slid away. Mayor Peter Snijders of Zwolle has issued an emergency order prohibiting farmers from… Continue reading Police intervene in...
I still remember that one time you sent me an article to correct my “right wing bs” that literally made the points I make. Then you claimed that I omitted some context discussing the article and slinked away when asked what it is I omitted. Totally acting in good faith here buddy.
The problem is that you apparently always only read what you want to hear and not what is actually written in the article, and no matter how many times I repeat that you should read the article and stick to the facts you always continue with the same BS and/or try to change the subject when it is clear that you lost the argument. Obviously I will not have endless discussions with you when you always conveniently change the topic when your are losing the argument or are just trying to get the last word in like some spoilt child.
The problem is that you never address my point, and never make any coherent counterpoints of your own. You just keep repeating that I should read the article that I entirely agree with and that makes the exact same point I’m making. Then when I point that out, you start claiming that I omitted some context. What context did I omit, what of my points are you disputing. The only spoilt child here is you, and everyone here sees it.
No the problem is that you always (intentionally?) fail to understand my point as you are arguing against some pro-NATO strawman that only exist in your head and when the argument doesn’t follow that pre-scripted line of thought you try to change the subject.
You should really start practising to understand what you are reading, because apparently you have extreme confirmation bias and just selectively pick the parts you like from an article and discard the rest.
I still remember that one time you sent me an article to correct my “right wing bs” that literally made the points I make. Then you claimed that I omitted some context discussing the article and slinked away when asked what it is I omitted. Totally acting in good faith here buddy.
The problem is that you apparently always only read what you want to hear and not what is actually written in the article, and no matter how many times I repeat that you should read the article and stick to the facts you always continue with the same BS and/or try to change the subject when it is clear that you lost the argument. Obviously I will not have endless discussions with you when you always conveniently change the topic when your are losing the argument or are just trying to get the last word in like some spoilt child.
The problem is that you never address my point, and never make any coherent counterpoints of your own. You just keep repeating that I should read the article that I entirely agree with and that makes the exact same point I’m making. Then when I point that out, you start claiming that I omitted some context. What context did I omit, what of my points are you disputing. The only spoilt child here is you, and everyone here sees it.
No the problem is that you always (intentionally?) fail to understand my point as you are arguing against some pro-NATO strawman that only exist in your head and when the argument doesn’t follow that pre-scripted line of thought you try to change the subject.
You should really start practising to understand what you are reading, because apparently you have extreme confirmation bias and just selectively pick the parts you like from an article and discard the rest.
Sounds to me like you’re projecting here.
Yeah, trying again to get the last word in… I have been telling you the same for months now, just try to do some introspection.