Black Dog Posted June 19, 2013 Report Posted June 19, 2013 Actually I did. Illusive, as in illusion. As in non-existent video that I prefaced illusive with each and every time. So you were just being redundant, then? Bad writing or bad spelling: pick your poison. Quote
g_bambino Posted June 19, 2013 Report Posted June 19, 2013 Anyone who has a grudge with Ford? I mean, that is just a guess as Ford has managed to make quite a few political enemies for his time in office. You'd have to narrow it down significantly from that before I'd even consider the possibility of a conspiracy. Quote
g_bambino Posted June 19, 2013 Report Posted June 19, 2013 There is no video... More completely unsubstantiated statements. Quote
Boges Posted June 19, 2013 Report Posted June 19, 2013 More completely unsubstantiated statements. Ditto with saying there IS a video. Quote
Black Dog Posted June 19, 2013 Report Posted June 19, 2013 Ditto with saying there IS a video. One more time: we have three eyewitnesses to the video. If three people claimed to witness a murder, but no body was found, would you so readily dismiss their claims? Quote
Boges Posted June 19, 2013 Report Posted June 19, 2013 One more time: we have three eyewitnesses to the video. If three people claimed to witness a murder, but no body was found, would you so readily dismiss their claims? If I didn't question the motives of the eyewitnesses. But even the Star said they can't verify the video's authenticity. It's not like you could go to court with this. Quote
guyser Posted June 19, 2013 Report Posted June 19, 2013 One more time: we have three eyewitnesses to the video. If three people claimed to witness a murder, but no body was found, would you so readily dismiss their claims? Yes, they would blame it on The Star. Quote
Shady Posted June 19, 2013 Report Posted June 19, 2013 So you were just being redundant, then? Bad writing or bad spelling: pick your poison. Nope. Poetic licence. Quote
Shady Posted June 19, 2013 Report Posted June 19, 2013 More completely unsubstantiated statements. Then show me the video. Sounds just like Saddam's WMDs. Quote
guyser Posted June 19, 2013 Report Posted June 19, 2013 It's not like you could go to court with this. You do know a murder conviction can be, and has been done, without a body....right? Quote
guyser Posted June 19, 2013 Report Posted June 19, 2013 Then show me the video. Sounds just like Saddam's WMDs. You are a funny little man. What about the 3 who saw the video? Are they illusive elusive not real too? Quote
Boges Posted June 19, 2013 Report Posted June 19, 2013 You do know a murder conviction can be, and has been done, without a body....right? With other forensic evidence. Like say the victims blood on a knife found with the suspect's finger prints on it. Quote
g_bambino Posted June 19, 2013 Report Posted June 19, 2013 Then show me the video. That doesn't substantiate your assertion. Quote
g_bambino Posted June 19, 2013 Report Posted June 19, 2013 Ditto with saying there IS a video. Did I say there was? Quote
g_bambino Posted June 19, 2013 Report Posted June 19, 2013 What about the 3 who saw the video? Are they illusive elusive not real too? The police are lying, too, when they said they, before the aforementioned three said they saw the video, recorded mention of the video in wiretapped conversations among those involved with the video, didn't you know? Quote
WWWTT Posted June 19, 2013 Author Report Posted June 19, 2013 Btw, what was Jack Layton doing in a massage parlour with a prostitute? Has anyone ever gotten to the bottom (pun intended) of that incident? Was that Chinese woman that gave Jack a massage convicted of soliciting for the intent of prostitution? Do you have the link? WWWTT Quote Maple Leaf Web is now worth $720.00! Down over $1,500 in less than one year! Total fail of the moderation on this site! That reminds me, never ask Greg to be a business partner! NEVER!
Shady Posted June 20, 2013 Report Posted June 20, 2013 You are a funny little man. What about the 3 who saw the video? Are they illusive elusive not real too? Little is always relative. Anyways, I can provide 3 people that say they saw bigfoot, and would swear to that in a court of law. Nobody has any idea what 3 people saw in terms of a video. We're suppose to just take their word for it? Nice try. Nobody's guilt or innocence should be weighed that way. Like I've already said, it's completely ridiculous and absurd. Quote
BubberMiley Posted June 20, 2013 Report Posted June 20, 2013 Actually, this thread reached a stalemate a long time ago in terms of the evidence and its believability. The only reason this topic is still active is so you can catch up with everything that happened while you were suspended. Quote "I think it's fun watching the waldick get all excited/knickers in a knot over something." -scribblet
Shady Posted June 20, 2013 Report Posted June 20, 2013 Actually, this thread reached a stalemate a long time ago in terms of the evidence and its believability. The only reason this topic is still active is so you can catch up with everything that happened while you were suspended. Uh oh, somebody's upset that they were pwned. Quote
BubberMiley Posted June 20, 2013 Report Posted June 20, 2013 Pwned? Are you talking about your misuse of the word "illusive?" I didn't think that's what you meant because that's an archaic word that means an illusion, which doesn't make sense in the context. Why would you say the video is an illusion? The drug dealers had magical powers? Wait. I think we debated that possibility back on page 42, but you were suspended at the time and couldn't possibly know. Quote "I think it's fun watching the waldick get all excited/knickers in a knot over something." -scribblet
Rue Posted June 20, 2013 Report Posted June 20, 2013 Making a false claim about someone does not mean asserting that someone made a false claim. It is attributing to that person something they neither did nor said. You intimated that I was making illogical arguments about proving truth. I did not. Yah you did for the reasons I stated, I am not sure what the above has to do with what you stated or I responded to either. In fact your latest statement appears illogical as well and I sound like Spock. It is illogical to infer fact in the absence of proof of that fact. It is illogical to demand proof of something not existing when that something has not been proven to exist. Quote
Shady Posted June 20, 2013 Report Posted June 20, 2013 Pwned? Are you talking about your misuse of the word "illusive?" I didn't think that's what you meant because that's an archaic word that means an illusion, which doesn't make sense in the context. Why would you say the video is an illusion? The drug dealers had magical powers? Wait. I think we debated that possibility back on page 42, but you were suspended at the time and couldn't possibly know. I used illusive in a completely appropriate fashion. I'm sorry that you were embarassed over your previous assumption, but it isn't my fault. The video is illusive because it doesn't exist, it's a figment of your imagination. Illusive isn't archaic, just because you're not accustomed to using it. Some of us have larger vocabularies than others. Get over it already. Quote
Shady Posted June 20, 2013 Report Posted June 20, 2013 Yah you did for the reasons I stated, I am not sure what the above has to do with what you stated or I responded to either. In fact your latest statement appears illogical as well and I sound like Spock. It is illogical to infer fact in the absence of proof of that fact. It is illogical to demand proof of something not existing when that something has not been proven to exist. Well said. Quote
BubberMiley Posted June 20, 2013 Report Posted June 20, 2013 Get over it already.I was going to leave it alone, but you brought it up again so I guess I have to point out how ridiculous it is to say the video is an illusion. It's almost as ridiculous as saying the video makers could have faked it with fancy digital technology. Quote "I think it's fun watching the waldick get all excited/knickers in a knot over something." -scribblet
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.