Turning The Ballot Box Against Republicans

@RABEL222,

Quote:

Making up shyt again Ollie? Or just lieing as usual?

Since you never have, and never will, prove either, why do you bother?

@coldjoint,

Progressives dislike reality, but they are unable to argue against it, so all they can do is concoct falsehoods about people like you and me when we tell the truth.

0 Replies

@glitterbag,

glitterbag wrote:

You are incredibly dense.

I'm the one with the 170 IQ. You're the one who isn't very smart.

glitterbag wrote:

There is no such thing as a general purpose intelligence agency.

Sure there is. Not all intelligence agencies have narrow missions.

glitterbag wrote:

Please don't respond to this post,

Request denied.

glitterbag wrote:

these flights of jumbled fantasies you unashamedly share as if you actually understand the topic.

Notice your inability to point out any errors in my posts?

My guess is that you are incapable of noticing.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

oralloy wrote:

glitterbag wrote:
There is no such thing as a general purpose intelligence agency.

Sure there is.

And that is?

3 Replies

@Walter Hinteler,

CIA, MI6, Mossad, and SVR all have pretty broad missions.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

No. For instance, none of those works domestically.

1 Reply

@Walter Hinteler,

It’s the one commanded by General Bradley Purpose, it deals with fuckwits and no hopers.

0 Replies

@Walter Hinteler,

Walter Hinteler wrote:

none of those works domestically.

That does not change the fact that they have pretty broad missions.

2 Replies

@Walter Hinteler,

Walter, if you keep reading his nonsense you will go blind.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

oralloy wrote:

Walter Hinteler wrote:
none of those works domestically.

That does not change the fact that they have pretty broad missions.

You don't really understand what he's saying to you, do you? It's OK, you don't have to be an expert on EVERYTHING. A smart person would never try to bluff their way on topics they don't understand, a smart person wouldn't like to look stupid. But then again, most smart people aren't that needy.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

You claimed that surely there are general purpose intelligence agencies.

1 Reply

@Walter Hinteler,

Not all intelligence agencies have narrow missions.

1 Reply

@glitterbag,

glitterbag wrote:

You don't really understand what he's saying to you, do you?

Of course I understand. He was pointing out that the agencies that I listed work outside their countries instead of inside their countries.

Don't assume that I have the same trouble understanding things that you do.

glitterbag wrote:

It's OK, you don't have to be an expert on EVERYTHING.

Don't worry. I'm not.

glitterbag wrote:

A smart person would never try to bluff their way on topics they don't understand,

That's not necessarily true. But I personally avoid bluffing. I'm no good at it, so I just don't do it. I prefer sticking to facts, which I am very good at.

glitterbag wrote:

a smart person wouldn't like to look stupid.

Smart people don't have to worry about such things.

glitterbag wrote:

But then again, most smart people aren't that needy.

False accusations of neediness are just an ad hominem to distract from your inability to point out any errors in my posts.

1 Reply

@glitterbag,

glitterbag wrote:

his nonsense

I knew you'd be incapable of recognizing your failure to point out any errors in my posts.

0 Replies

@oralloy,

oralloy wrote:

Not all intelligence agencies have narrow missions.

Name one agency that has a narrow mission. I'll wait.

1 Reply

@glitterbag,

I already did that earlier. A couple times in fact.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

oralloy wrote:

glitterbag wrote:
You don't really understand what he's saying to you, do you?

Of course I understand. He was pointing out that the agencies that I listed work outside their countries instead of inside their countries.

((That's not what he was pointing out))

Don't assume that I have the same trouble understanding things that you do.

((Bluster doesn't mean You actually understand))

glitterbag wrote:
It's OK, you don't have to be an expert on EVERYTHING.

Don't worry. I'm not.

((Oh boy, I'll agree with you on that point)))

glitterbag wrote:
A smart person would never try to bluff their way on topics they don't understand,

That's not necessarily true. ((It's absolutely true, and everyone else knows it))
'
But I personally avoid bluffing. ((No you don't)) I'm no good at it, so I just don't do it. (( Well it's true you are not any good ab out bluffing on Intell)) I prefer sticking to facts, (((I would love to see you do that))) which I am very good at. (( OK, I think this qualifies as pointing out something that is wrong, wrong, wrongiddy wrong))))

glitterbag wrote:
a smart person wouldn't like to look stupid.

Smart people don't have to worry about such things. ((you missed the point, smart people know when to stop talking and when to listen and learn))

glitterbag wrote:
But then again, most smart people aren't that needy.

False accusations of neediness are just an ad hominem (((OMG did someone call you needy)) to distract from your inability to point out any errors in my posts.

.

I have never ever seen you admit to a mistake. It's painfully clear that you know absolutely nothing about the Intell Community but you try to double down with vague comments that mean absolutely nothing...nada...zip..zero. At best only another person completely unaware of "Intell Community" would think that you know what you're talking about...It's a very lazy way to go thru life.

I'm typing this at 15:05 EST and the death toll in America from the Corona virus is just shy of 84,000.....Stay safe people

1 Reply

@oralloy,

oralloy wrote:

I already did that earlier. A couple times in fact.

Oh please, tell me you don't mean M16.

2 Replies

@glitterbag,

While you are pretty clueless, you are correct to note that I did not mean MI6.

Perhaps the first correct thing that you've said.

1 Reply

@glitterbag,

Actually, using a British intelligence agency is dumb since from the beginning in the 19th century all were specialised (the one of the British Army had different purposes to that of the Royal Navy).

1 Reply

Turning The Ballot Box Against Republicans

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know